is Dune: Part 2 worth the hype?
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 03. 2024
- Nadia and Jake review Dune: Part 2 (2024).
merch: mancarryingthing.com
Nadia's Instagram: womancarrying?i...
Jake's Instagram: / mancarrying. .
Jake's twitter: / mancarrying
Patreon: / mancarryingthing
TikTok: / mancarryingthing
Reddit: / mancarryingt. .
Discord: / discord
Jake's Letterboxd: letterboxd.com/ManCarrying/
Want to send us something? Do it here:
PO Box 7887
Bonney Lake, WA 98391
#dune #duneparttwo - Zábava
Chani doesn’t flip though. She stayed the same. She even tells Paul she will be with him as long as he stays who he is. He doesn’t stay who he is. She stayed consistent
I heard that they had cut an important line from the book, when paul says that he will love her until his last breath to chani.
that's in the movie@@rare_red
That line actually isn't cut, he says it I think twice in the film
@@rare_red
@@rare_redThat's in the movie
Totally agree, what I don't get is why Paul flipped so quickly
"Take them to Paradise"
-Me, aggressively coercing my friends and family to the theater so I can miss the author's point again.
The irony in his voice with that comment spoke volumes, sure sounded to me that he was accepting what was coming, knowing full well what that meant, and in no way did he seem happy about it. Anyone who walked away from this thinking Paul was a real hero missed the point. Like a true tragic hero, Paul accepted a fate to protect his loved ones, not so much humanity.
I think overall everything works out for humanity, like 10,000 years after the movie ends… so I think that’s the point, maybe?
What's the authors point?
@@Sam_T2000 Not thanks to Paul though. He abandons the golden path out of fear and basically fucks humanity until his kid comes in to clean his shit up.
@@Deafz - but wasn’t that what Paul intended? that Leto would do all that?
Dune Messiah will start with a text crawl saying "The 61 Billion Dead Speak!"
This is too good 😂
Somehow Baron returned!
I always imagine the Messiah movie starting with opening crawl of some wast religious tapestry depicting the persecution and mass killing of local believers by the fremen maybe with even archeological commentary.
@@frantisekhajek6775 We'll probably get Princess Irulan diaries again to catch up
@@frantisekhajek6775Awh, that’s sick dude!
My fav moment is when Paul said that Arrakis used to be called Dune because that's the title of the movie.
Mine was when they said Among Us
@@NetoSutamits true, my favorite part too
Oh that's why they call it that
Mine was when he said "it's spicy time" and then he spiced all over the place.
but the movie is called _”Dune, Part.”_ sad.
I can just feel how hard it is for him to not just stop and explain the full plot of Messiah
[SPOILERS]
I have read the book.
I think Denis captured the essence of the book very well, he gave Chani a lot more depth, and Timothée Chalamet played a very good Paul.
It was sad not to see Hawat in this movie, but I still think Denis worked out not having him in the movie.
Having Alia stay in the womb was honestly a very good thing, it’s hard to get a child to act like an adult. Also, Paul killing the Baron instead of Alia was a lot more Climactic for the story
9/10
I agree, the changes all served the movie, I find movie Chani more interesting than book Chani.
My biggest concern going into this was Alia and how they would manage her character at a young age, because it is batsh*t insane. Denis handled it perfectly.
I liked most of the changes but am worried about how it is going to affect the final movie. There was a lot of things in book 2 that depended on how the end of book 1 was (it was almost an extended epilogue of the first book) so it will be difficult to come out with the same effect of the second book with the current changes. I don't want it all retconned either because it will ruin the previous movie.
Rabban getting just dunked on at every opportunity is funny.
It's kinda like that in the book. he's incompetent
@@murphy7801didnt the Baron explicitly set him up to fail in the book? or am I misremembering?
Yeah he did
***SPOILERS***
I honestly don’t know how Denis managed to take such an implicitly likeable underdog hero turn into such a truly terrifying villain, leading to a final battle that’s an absolute no-win scenario without losing a drop of tension or investment from the audience
If you see Muad'Dib as a vilain, wait to see the one who did abandonned all humanity (for us all)
huh?@@Moneo_Atreides
You mean Frank Herbert. The author
Actually, Frank pretty famously didn't get his message across in Dune. The majority of people that went through the story read Paul as a hero, while Frank meant him to be seen as an anti-hero. This was so prevalent that people were put off by Messiah and it was considered a massive letdown by fans at time of release.
@@TryingExtraHard my point was that it wasn't the director that wrote the characters
2:16 In retrospect, Dune Part 1 did start with a narration from Chani making it seem like she is telling us the story
its a shame they cut out the Spacing Guild completely.
Yeah that was one of the most massive gaps in the story. They kind of band-aided over it with “I will nuke the spice” but that felt completely insufficient.
their presence looms over the story. they're not written out at all. in part 1, they're mentioned in pauls educational material before he goes to arrakis.
it would be kind of weird to be mentioning them all the time. we live in a world where banks are extremely powerful but its not like we talk about them all the time. we say "i got paid" and "i'm getting money from the atm" just like how people in the dune universe talk about harvesting spice. and space travel. they don't need to explicitly mention "we're harvesting spice to give to the spacing guild to allow the possibility of interstellar travel." it wouldn't make any sense for the characters to be saying that out loud. they just know
@@deetvleet They get one mention. They are integral to the plot in the source material and are brought up a lot for that reason. I'm sure that's what OP was referring to.
@@SgtWicket I understand that. But I think they had to reduce their role in the first and second movies in order to make the story more accessible to a lay-audience. they can be filled in on the details at the start of messiah, and then knowing the spacing guild has been working in the shadows from the beginning will be more interesting on a rewatch for movie-watchers
us book-readers just get a preview of that now since we know the spoilers
I have a feeling that they'll play a bigger role in Messiah.
I'm with Jake, there wasn't nearly enough of the weirdness from the books for my liking, though the scenes on the Harkonnen planet were spectacular and definitely deserve their own spin-off. It is interesting to hear what Nadia as a non-book reader thinks will happen next, hard to imagine anyone doing that and getting remotely close to what happens!
I really think they are afraid of scaring off general audiences
As a non-reader, the movies feel alien enough I think. Since everything is shown, not told, it's much more difficult to present a lot of alien stuff and assume the audience can understand any of it. Denis deliberately grounds the films, but there's every chance he slowly dials up the weirdness in later films.
Non-book readers:
The movie is weird and there’s alot of stuff going on
Book readers:
The movie isn’t weird enough and the movie doesn’t have enough in it
I think that’s the reason I didn’t like the first dune. Part 2 was a lot more enjoyable because there was more going on, but in hindsight I can’t help but feel like they’re generic sci fi movies with over the top effects that don’t let time for these characters to breathe
@@samd2013I didn't read the book but I could sense that they was so much weird shit I know we weren't being shown. We never saw space travel. I wanted to see those weird navigator guys
Id give it a 10/10 even with the major changes to things i think the changes really worked for this adaptation
I felt it missed the parallel between Chani and Paul and Leto and Jessica with how it treated their relationship and I was sad there wasn't any of the spacers guild as they're a major player in pauls inauguration.
Same, I REALLY wanted to see the spacing guild and the navigators, I hope they're in part 3
I think it is a good choice not to include the Spacing Guild prominently at that point because they were not featured heavily in both movies beyond "oh yea they exist and they are an analogy of shipping and spice is like oil". Including them at such a climatic point will be very jarring and destroy the moment. The reason why both movie worked so well is that Denis Villeneuve and Jon Spaihts have a very tight control over the storyboard and remove everything not necessary to telling the story in its most elemental form, allowing us to stay focused on the characters, and the events as they unfold.
I think Dune will be a masterclass example of adaptation and script writing. Tight, focused, controlled and very very compelling.
Same, I feel like Leto is the "good" version of Paul. Like he gives his opportunities for Lady Jessica and Paul just cannot do that because all the fremens and atreides united need him.
It wasn't psychedelic enough for me. Like earlier today i was reading God Emperor of Dune, and I'm sitting there reading about this worm dude flipping out in his deep dark underground pit eating sand and it's like what in the actual hell is going on right now? Just the thought of it is absurd. I really only got that feeling a couple times in the film. The arena scene like you mentioned, the Harkonnen Mentats computating around the map, and the Baron floating in broad daylight in all his fucking weirdness. I don't know, I'm reading the books right now and they trip me out, they take me to a whole other place that I've never been to before. It's the epitome of escapism. The film was great, i give it probably an 8/10. But you don't know Dune unless you read the books.
I do kind of feel you, like maybe the water of life scenes could have been psychedelic. But the second half of the original dune just isnt as psychedelic as the later books, especially god emperor. Heres to hoping we get those movies too!
Idk I thought the whole Jessica drinks the water of life, gets bizarre face tattoos and becomes a psychopath for the rest of the movie was pretty weird. I thought the drowning of the little worm baby to get the water of life was pretty odd. I thought the Bene Gesserit seduction of Feyd was pretty unnerving, and Feyd in general, especially his knife licking and cannibalistic servants.
Oh and the talking fucking fetus, that was pretty strange
@trombonegamer14 when Jessica drinks the Water, she gets the Other Memories of all the reverend mothers who came before. Alia also gets those memories, and becomes a reverend mother before birth.
The Water of Life comes from drowning sandworms.
@dongiovanni4331 yes I'm aware I've read the books. Doesn't mean it's not strange as bell
My only gripe was the final battle was'nt a battle it was a massacre poor Emperor Corrino's Elite army( The best in the Galaxy)of saudakr Never saw the Fremen Worm wave coming you would think they were Harkonnen soldiers the way they went out🤣
Feyd being declared a genius for thinking of using artillery against an enemy in fixed known position.The Emperor of the Known Universe's personal ship, with seemingly no support craft, allows enemy atomic missiles to fly past it without any means intercepting them. Sardaukar having no ground transportation/heavy weaponry. I won't pretend to be an expert in miliary tactic's but even to me it seems like the Emperor deserved his fate on the basis of incalculable hubris.
@@nrgspike there is something to this extent within the books actually. Herbert seems really fascinated by the idea of harsh conditions creating strong fighters. That's why the Sardaukar are trained on the hell planet of Salusa Secundus, and why the desert shapes such fierce warriors out of the Fremen. However, after their training, especially the Sardaukar officers lead comfortable lives and become "water-fat" to use the Fremen expression. They become comfortable, and hence, militarily weak. On the other hand, the harshness of the desert is an omnipresent fact in the Fremen life, and thus the warriors remain strong.
The strategic shortcomings of the emperor and his Sardaukar reflect this disparity, as well as their general dismissal of the possibility of a formidable Fremen force.
It’s the same way in the books. It’s a slaughter and Paul is barely even challenged at almost any point
@@anttiasikainen3124 I understand but it just wasn't terribly engaging from a cinematic point of view. It's similar to how the Army of the Dead arrives in Return of the King and just 'wins' as there's no counter to them.
I know it's not in the book but for some filmic tension, the Sardaukar could have used lasers to cut up a worm or two, at least wound them enough to have the Fremen be thrown off and get some hand-to-hand fighting going on, just have some semblance of an actual 'fight'.
@@nrgspike The movie still cut a lot of things from the book. Warfare in the book is very different due to shield technology being so prevalent, as well as interference by the Spacing Guild and the Landsraad. In the books, everyone has shields so projectile weapons are not very useful. That's why learning to knife fight is so important. You can't kill people guns, missiles, or bombs since they have shields, so you have to get up and close, the slow blade penetrates the shield.
The only two ranged weapons that are effective against shields are lasguns and atomics. And lasguns cause nuclear explosions when they hit shields so no one is crazy enough to use them against shields. And use of atomics is forbidden by the treaty between the Great Houses. Anyone who uses atomics offensively will have their planet destroyed by the other Great Houses.
The other thing that restricts warefare is the Spacing Guild and the Landsraad. Since almost all FTL space travel is controlled by the Spacing Guild, wars cannot be fought without their approval since they're only ones who can transport troops between planets. And the Spacing Guild's main concern is interstellar commerce so they don't like it when things disrupt their profits. So the Landsraad, the council of all the Great Houses, has to sanction war between different Houses, and set conditions to minimize damage and disruption to commerce.
In the book, it's actually the Baron who thought to use artillery, and it's considered smart because they haven't fought a war without shields for thousands of years. And Paul using atomics was an insane strategy because it basically unites all the Houses against him. The only reason why Paul is able to get away with it is because he controls the Spice. No one can do anything against him because if he destroys the Spice, he destroys interstellar travel and potentially brings down all human civilization.
*SPOILER*
One thing I was slightly dissapointed with was the use of atomics. The genius of its use is that atomic usage on human was punishable by planetary destructcion, but Paul only used them to destroy the wall and doom Arakeen to the sandstorms. Another point in Paul's morally gray and villanous actions was that he used illegal and dangerous stuff to win the Imperium. But in the movie they were just "lmao nuke them", and neither Jessica nor the Fremen were against their usage.
Yeah I’m with you. Wanted to mention it to someone during the movie because it seemed like an important detail. just knowing it from the book gave the scene some context and made me enjoy the movie more.
I think the decision to cut those discussions was strictly for efficiency of pacing. By then the movie was steam rolling with excitement and adrenaline and it just had to stay on that high.
Got to play to an American audience who likes nukes
I mean, they still didn't use them against people. They aimed them squarely at the Shield Wall.
@@blankmantm2501 their usage wasn't the problem, but the character's reactions to them. Sure, in the books they didn't react that much either, but I was expecting some opposition. Those are, at the end of the day, atomic warheads.
Enjoyed the movie a lot as well, but I just wish there was more weird Dune shit in it
That's why the Lynch version is so memorable even if it's not a great movie. This is a great movie(s) that aren't quite memorable, because they're well-grounded.
I wish the whole movie was as weird as Geidi Prime. I wish all of the ships looked as weird as the Harkonnen ships.
I had fun listening to all of Nadia's theories knowing where the story is heading.
Honestly after the ending of this movie i have no idea how faithfully Messiah will be adapted, so who knows how true her theories will be lol.
“Zendaya is going to lead future films”
Who’s gonna tell her?
Tell her what
@@ladnie9454 Not sure I should give spoilers on this thread
@@raymondmeyers8983 Oh I now realize. Yeah probably not.
@@raymondmeyers8983 I think you already gave the spoiler 💀
Loved the movie Denis Villenuve is absolutely amazing
I was completely locked into the film the whole time, might stay my favorite of the year.
@@jacobp8294 let’s hope the year surprises us and somehow we get a few movies even better, unlikely but would love to see it happen
I like that they consistently introduce the dogs like they’re going to take part in the discussion. I like to believe the dogs do talk off camera and are just being rude by sleeping thru the vid.
I finished reading dune the day before I saw part 2. I liked the movie overall, and most of the changes were understandable. Though I'm not sure I'm a huge fan of the changes in character's motives. I thought it was weird when Jessica was like 'I need paul to drink the water of life' when in the book she never would have said or even thought that.
i agree, also i hated what they did to chani imo
For now, I'd go with a 4/5 star rating. As someone who's read the book (and the next two after it) multiple times in my life, I was a little let down at how many things got cut from the story, but I can't really fault DV for making the hard choices that needed to be made with a film adaptation of such challenging material. He had to honor the book while also making something that would work for audiences who'd never read it. There are, after all, plenty of people who find the novels boring, slow, and overly self-serious (which they can be). In fact, a friend of mine who's never read the books LOVES both movies.
In terms of audiovisual experience, I was hugely impressed. Part One grew on me after a second viewing, when I could pay more attention to all the little details. For example, with Part Two, there's a scene where bats were squeaking in terror during a Harkonnen attack. They sounded a lot like rats, which is just what the Harkonnens kept calling the Fremen. Later, there's a moment where you see an overweight Sarduakar trooper in the emperor's throne room, which communicates something about imperial decadence. (If I remember right from the books, the Sarduakar had gotten a little "soft" by the time of Dune.) So many little touches like that.
It's funny to see people comparing this movie to the LOTR films. When those first came out, I remember that there were lots of complaints from book purists online. Now, though, those seem to be widely regarded as a peak filmmaking. Deviations from the source material have a way of fading from memory over the years.
I give it a 5/5 for being one of best adaptations of a book into a movie ever. He did make some hard choices but he made the right ones that enhanced the movie mode of storytelling, even if it was not fully faithful to the book. If someone wants the full story, then they should really read the book.
I think when people start to stop thinking about comparing superficial stuff like how faithful Dune is compared the LOTR to their respective books, we can finally get to the gist of comparing the worldview of Herbert and Tolkien on religion, leadership, spirituality and faith.
It's likely that Part Two will grow on me further with repeat viewings. If you know a book well (and have for decades), it's always jarring to see changes made by a movie adaptation, even when you understand that the changes were done for a good reason. It can take a rewatch or two before my brain makes the adjustment to the story as it is in the films.
If a movie ends up being a good movie, than what ever it did to transform into a good movie is forgiven. But it will never be as good as the one in your head. Which is why I appreciate that the Dune movies don't explain everything. It incentivizes people to explore the lore and check out the books
I think DV did an awesome job, in both films, of *showing* how the Dune universe works, while using verbal explanations in a carefully measured way. (E.g. Chani's opening narration for Part One.)
>> But it will never be as good as the one in your head.
Not always true. Sometimes, filmmakers can imagine elements of a story even better than I did. For example, I never really had any great ideas about how ornithopters looked and worked. They seemed very believable in these movies.
@ryanmcmahon7421 I meant your own subjective reading experience will often engage you more than any audiovisual experience because you have no practical considerations to make, no budget or limited shoot time to keep you from imagining the full scope of what's being described or the exactness of the nuances in a character's movements or expression. That's not to say which medium is superior. It's just the inherent tradeoffs between the two. That being said, I totally agree that sometimes movies make more coherent design choices that just work better than what I previously imagined, or an actor commits a performance to memory that overrides how I originally visualized a character.
I saw the movie last night. And honestly it would take me a while to express in words how much i loved so ill just say. Visuals. Outsanding. Characters. Everyone brought an unbelievable intensity to there respective rolls. Story. I honestly cant bring myself to complain over the parts they left out. And of course . Thank you Hans Zimmer
Couldn’t focus on the review, dogs are too cute
One thing inreally liked was the mirroring of some of the scene in the first movie but with and inversion. It's a very subtle way to foreshadow Paul's changes and to show rhe state of the story, it goes from having everything takes away from them, to retalistion and finally submission.
Part of what makes Villeneuve's screen adaptationd successful is that they stay true to the books thematically, giving him considerable latitude to make omissions and changes without enraging too many book purists. His films are cinematic triumphs in their own right, telling the same story without getting bogged down in unnecessary detail or over-complicating the narrative with meandering subplots and labyrinthine intrigue. Also, his changes mostly make sense for the big screen.
Of course, it's impossible to please everyone with a project of this magnitude, and there are already a slew of vids on CZcams by book nerds who hated these movies, but they probably wouldn't have been happy unless this was a 14-hour epic in 7 parts, or something. Well they can complain all they like, audiences overwhelmingly loved Villeneuve's vision, and Parts 1 and 2 are well on track to becoming among the biggest grossing and highest-rated films of all time.
Haters gonna hate, but they're mostly shouting into the void at this point.
I dont wanna spoil messiah but Florence pughs character aint really a love interest
more like a THIRST intrest
@@hurgcatif anything a power thirst interest
@johnpaulcross424 I mean if you read the book she is a thirsty ass mofo for that kwizatussy but cannot claim the prize haha
Political marriage is political
if you have to add a “but” then it’s obviously a spoiler!
I appreciated most of the changes, they were smart. They managed to get the themes across pretty successfully and really went deep into the social engineering work of the missionaria protectiva and the bene gesserit in general, which was the part I really needed to be conveyed well. The contrast of Paul's desires and the reality of the indoctrination he's benefitting from is something Lynch doesn't even attempt and the miniseries kinda drops halfway through. And I have to agree about Chani, this is an improvement over her book counterpart, and Zendaya's portrayal is a big part of it.
The whole cast does a great job, can't complain, but the performances that really stuck for me were Ferguson and Bardem.
Messiah is my personal favorite of the original run, so I'm really excited for the bext chapter.
Thanks for the video, it made it more clear what I personally think about the movie. Also love the puppers.
I actually like the first one more than the second because it feels more localized. I got lost a few times in part 2 and lost the emotional connection sometimes. Paul loves the fremen but I hadn't felt it yet. I think I'm used to TV shows having more time for it, but part 2 eventually felt like it was jumping ahead to the big important plotlines. Same with paul and chani's relationship. For me it went from crush to deep love so quickly and I had to catch up. Ah, that's the word.
I loved the movie, and I also feel like I was trying to catch up a lot because of it jumping to important plotlines and conclusions. Masterfully crafted, amazing music, some COLD moments and scenery that made me scared of the haderach.
My only real gripe was the Paul-Chani romance scenes were a little cheesy. Timothee's switch when his transformation happens, the quiet intensity he brought was soo good
I thought it worked though because those scenes were so tender but the whole time something just felt off as if they both knew how things were gonna end up happening. Like Chani doesn’t seem shocked and horrified and surprised at Paul’s arc she’s just angry and hurt
Imagine Hayden Christensen in this movie
why does it feel increasingly like audiences are becoming allergic to the concept of earnest and sincere relationships? Wtf is wrong with cheesy?
@@littleredruri Maybe they just needed more time on-screen, I dunno, something to think about when I get a chance to re-watch
I just had a hard time believing that Chani was genuinely in love with Paul, and I'm trying to figure out if that's because of the film direction or Zendaya's acting.
My favourite scene was Paul's speech to followers in the south
I think they over-surfaced the subtext of the book and made Chani an annoyance moreso than a revolutionary towards the end. The film over-communicated the manipulation of the Fremen and the lie beneath the prophecy. I think the movie could have used less dialogue explaining the conflicts between Jessica and Paul’s goals against the Fremen, and instead should have showed the dire consequences of following Paul. Communicate how many have died in Paul’s wake after the battle of Arrakeen, show small moments where Paul disregards the Fremen’s interests in favor of his own and how the Fremen kind of overlook that, instead of characters shouting “as written” or “the prophecy enslaves us!” I also thought while the film was largely well-shot, there was a good 20% of the film where I felt they were using very unusual options for scenes, like Paul waking up or their arrival to the sietch the first time. It was not as good as Part 1 to me - not as interesting or subtle, and not as interesting or subtle as the book. I think the payoff for a lot of this shows itself in Messiah and does not need to foreshadow itself so dramatically.
They cranked it up but the message is still lost on people somehow lol. It's almost like how nearly impossible it is to make an anti war film
Yeah I feel the same, I think I liked the first one more, I liked part 2, don’t get me wrong, amazing visuals and sound, but I didn’t absolute love it, I didn’t come out going WOW! I just kinda was like, well that was cool I guess.
With how hyped the Fremen were about the Lisan al Gaib being real and right there in front of them Chani and the revolutionaries would have 100% been executed for heresy. Not in front of Paul but some fanatics would have tried to poison her or kill her in her sleep, claiming she was unworthy to be Pauls bride or whatever. Like, in the book it's clear that basically 100% of the fremen agree the prophecy is true, they are just not convinced Paul is the one. Bc how would they even know that the prophecy was a tool used by the Bene Gesserit? Anyone saying that kind of stuff would be killed, or the religion would not have lasted for the hundreds of years that it did. I think that whilst giving Chani more to do was a good change, going the "the same character that Zendaya has played in everything she has been in" route wasn't the right call. I enjoyed the stuff where she was actually teaching him the ways of the desert, but it felt like she hated Paul for most of the movie rather than in the books where she is obviously completely in love with him at this point, if also scared of him bc he was starting his bad boy arc and becoming an unfeeling monster
Most of the time I just love watching how much your dogs love you all! The way they pile onto you guys as if they would die if they dont merge into you all. My dog & cat do the same thing.❤
I loved the movie but totally get what Jake is saying. So much that I loved in the book is the weird psychedelic experiences and interesting psychological subtext. I do think Villeneuve did an excellent job of presenting the themes of Paul not being a real hero - better even than the novel. With the focus on that, though, there’s a lot of other themes that I felt were dropped in translation. Still loved it. I think part two is a better movie but part one is a better adaptation.
i wanted to see more Feyd to be honest... i was transfixed by Austin's character and his portrayal, his screen time was too short.
Also felt the humour was kinda forced in some parts and some of Javier's character lines felt... out of place, somehow? or like too much, im gonna go watch it a second time and think more about it.
It was a really good movie, i liked it more than the first one. And the use of the silence was fantastic and it added a lot to the battles and several scenes. Nice touch.
I agree with you on Javier. They made him a bit ridiculous to point out what believers turn into when it comes to religion and prophecy in an otherwise serious movie so it sticks out
Idk as an atheist this how most religious people sound to me. So I found it believable.
But also stilgar had much love for Paul like a son which I liked, dad's can be silly and fun.
Edit: If they make a third movie then that's totally cool. Solid cliffhanger into a trilogy finale.
"I thought it started out HOT. That ride scene put a big stupid smile on my face. But the ending and climax just felt..... meh. Like I knew what was gonna happen before it happened, and it just ended. Thats just me though."
the book literally just ends like that idk what to tell you.
next book is 12 years later so dont expect the same level of leading into the next film
Pretty sure it's confirmed
@@jarrydgasson1802 ah I didnt know that. Well as a person experiencing the story for the first time, I thought it was an extremely fast paced ending with little to no catharsis. Changed the movie from 5 stars to 4.
@@billycostigan1247 very fair i promise it would feel just as rushed reading it though. i would recommend at least the first 3 books highly as the best trilogy ever written
That we even need to ask if something is "worth the hype" shows there's something deeply wrong with the way we experience and are made aware of media.
didn't you know? anything that comes out now, regardless of medium, is either "the greatest masterpiece of all time" or "literally no cultural impact". there's nothing else, just that binary.
We live in a society head ass
Why? There's always gonna be differences in quality, and there're always gonna be expectations for a certain quality. What's wrong with answering if our expectations are justified? Sure, a lot of shitty movies come out every year, but in what world is the question "is this as good as i hope it is?" somehow an example of a flawed system?
It is fair to point out that for the most part the commercialization happened outside of the film. Sure, the marketing was in a lot of ways modern day mega blockbuster-hypetrain centered (god, the floating heads poster), but none of it exists in the movie itself, no post credit scenes, no effort to hint countless more movies or series out of it or sell merchandise similarly to what Disney does with every franchise. I know it should be bare minimum, but still I think it is perceived more as a piece of art and less as a product, especially in modern day standards.
@@anormalperson7161 That's the issue though, expectation of quality is an element easily manipulated by marketing and rarely happens organically.
And as a result, perception of quality after the fact gets affected by this expectation of quality through various psychological biases (halo effect, anchoring effect, etc.). We see this regularly with average/bad popular movies that get good feedback as they come out, but then people gradually start thinking about them and public opinion turns. That's the delay until people stop being affected by the hype period that put the image of quality as their expectation.
Anyway. I guess all I want to say is: marketing and advertising is a bane on our existence, and capitalism sucks. Nothing new.
(I'm very excited for this new Dune movie though, the previous one was great)
I get the criticism that the movie is cold and not as well rounded as a movie like Empire Strikes Back, but that works for me. The Dune universe, whether that be the Villeneuve Movies, the Lynch movie, or the book, is a very creepy, ominous, horrible feudal state with almost nothing appealing about it. It’s Westeros in space. The strong survive, the weak die, and everything without a “purpose” is disposed of and recycled.
In that environment, I am fine with having fewer characters that I care about because the world and the setting is the focus along with the allegory of political and religious figures coming to power.
Visuals, Audio, World design, and acting were all great. I’m somewhat confused why they changed the story with Chani’s character though (Zendaya was great though). Also wish they didn’t condense so much of the book’s timeline to fit it into a 2 part series, but it IS a pretty thick book so I get it. But with the changes with Chani, I really don’t know how they’re supposed to do Messiah since you know… they’re together for most of that book and Alia is also a big part of it too. I guess they could just insert each of them into it, but I feel like Chani’s decision at the end of part 2 would fall flat and so would Alia’s whole arc without any proper build up / introduction. Idk. Pretty good movie though!
With the changes made with Chani’s story and even Alia, I’m more interested than ever to see Dune Messiah
As someone that has read the books, I am very curious how they adapt Messiah - some light spoiler ahead, but I remain fairly vague.
Chani being more critical of Paul, and generally a more complex character, was great for the second movie, as was making the themes of a charismatic leader being a problem for the people he leads more clear, to avoid the situation that Frank Herbert had where his fans were disappointed by Messiah, because it made the message clearer and people hated seeing their special hero Paul Muad'Dib Atreides "become" flawed.
However that has some serious rammifications for a (potential?) third movie. Chani/Paul/Irulan dynamic are a big part of Messiah, but the movie sets their dynamic up to be quite different. There is also a decent chunk of worldbuilding that seems hard to skip over that might make the third movie even drier (haha like a desert) than it otherwise would be - Alia's personality hasn't been established, Guild Navigators didn't appear yet, Reverend mothers being able to confer with all of their past lifes is also only hinted at.
I liked the first movie enough to get into all 6 books and I enjoyed the second movie as an adaptation of the first book, but I am sceptical about how thye can keep everyhting together in future films.
Major change is chani role in Paul reincarnation/reborn. it wasnt there in the book, they add it in film
Maybe you forgot but it's partly in the book. Read it for the first time before watching part 2 so it's still fresh in my mind. She doesn't do the tears thing, but she does tell them to give him more worm juice(tm) to make him wake up after Jessica fails to wake him for 3 weeks
I agree a little bit. I felt like it could be a bit weirder and maybe a bit less polished in some parts. The desert scenes don’t really feel lived in some parts, and they could have done more to go in depth with all the religious and deserty(no water) weirdness there was.Those are some nitpicks. The feyd scenes was the highlight to me as well and I do love some of the vision scenes
Edit :- love the religious critique theme it went for as well. Stayed true to the book and presented it in what I thought was pretty understated (while you sorta get swapped by the narrative)
im an og 6 book purist and a "only book one is a masterpiece" hater, so u cant get any more stingy about dune. This movie is perfect in absolutely every way
I see you have the entire Dark Tower series on your shelf (yes I'm that guy), what do you think of it? I have yet to dive into King but that looks like his most compelling work to me, and I've been eying the first book at my job on and off.
On a related note, I friggin love this movie and the book. I'm very curious about some of the changes, as it seemed the biggest diversion SPOILERS was the omission of Alia being born and her killing the Baron, and the ending with Chani. END SPOILERS. There were also some interesting character omission, but I think overall Denis did a fantastic job parring down the story into something more focused. Going to see it for the second time tomorrow evening. I need to read Messiah now. I read the first book in a span of several months and was engrossed in the universe, seeing Denis bring it to life so well has been sorta surreal. I can agree it felt very stoic and serious for most of the movie, but Stilgar brought some great "relief" with his endless worship of Paul.
Book and film spoilers:
...
Where was the Thufir Hawat death scene?!? Most tragic omission of the source material in the film. 😭
No Alia dissapoints me, she was like a four year old super ninja
the ultimate battle scene is kinda short
Thought it was great, I did think gurneys revenge against rabban was lackluster, still a 9/10 movie though
everything of major significance in the film felt amazing with an IMAX video and sound system, but then when you think back on it it all just feels unbelievably rushed more than anything.
I don't see what seeing the full battle brings to the story, the ending already feels "satisfying" even if unnerving@@johncra8982
@@johncra8982just because something is fast paced doesn’t mean it’s rushed
well, that is a faithful adaption from the book the, where it is a paragraph :P
??? A switch in protagonist??? I mean the ending seems more like chantis moment to ponder more so where her try place in this is . She’s here for her people but they all follow a falls prophet down an unknown future . Who does she support now ? What will the future of arakkis be ? Will Paul and this empire of his become the new oppressors?? That’s what I got from the ending . Not her being the lead for future films 😂 interesting thought tho
A great movie but sadly suffered from being released so close to the morbius writers new masterpiece madame web.
i was kind of hoping for more emphasis on the deeply romantic core between chani and paul because those small moments really shown through in the film. though it also might just be how i interpreted the books and where they placed the emphasis
I think Chanis character was much more understanding at the end of the book than in this movie. Paul even said that he wouldn't have children with Princess Iruna in the last scene, so the tension wasn't that high between Paul and Chani at the end of the first book.
my main criticism is they should've shown a glimpse of how ruthless and massive the jihad is. even a vision of fire or something would've sufficed.
if one is to spend most of the film conveying Paul's trepidation, i needed confirmation of the consequences for this part to feel resolved.
i recall Denis says he treats each part as his potentially-final installment, but i don't believe it this time. it didn't feel self-contained or complete.
I think Chani is pretty clear from the beginning that she just wants Paul to stay who he is and when he changes and does what he does at the end she’s probably pissed off and heartbroken
I finally saw it at my local LieMAX. I was surprised by its solemn tone, but I felt it was thematically too thin to justify such seriousness. But at the same time I was glad that it exists in such form. For too many years now popular entertainment relied on the roller coaster ride formula to deliver story and spectacle and Dune movies are the antidote to that.
Austin Butler was fun to watch. He made some interesting acting choices in a role that would be too easy to play as a formulaic psycho.
Yes. It’s incredible
Been curious about something that I want hardcore Dune fans opinion on. Since these movies atm will probably only cover Messiah, do you worry that the core, truly exciting ideas of the books won’t be captured? For me the greatness of Dune is the weird shit and these wild explorations of power and legacy and that only really gets going later on in the series, right? If some of that wild energy from the later books doesn’t make it to the movies, then I fear the movies won’t hit the core thematic point that the books hit
I'm a reasonably hardcore fan and I feel that if Messiah is done well, that will be a fitting place to stop, having successfully encompassed the most important aspects of the early story without leaving too much of a door open to severely mishandle later books (strong possiblity because of their content).
@@hhoi8225 I second this. I already think Villeneuve is playing with fire going into Messiah, but I trust it because these first two were so solid, with some missteps here and there. If he were able to make the movies without having to worry about them being profitable and having broad appeal, he would probably be able to explore the more "out there" themes, but I think Dune and Dune Messiah are the "mass appeal" books and if he can make those hit, that'll be way more than I expected any filmmaker to do with the Dune books in my lifetime.
I agree with you about how it feels not very emotional and distant. Spoilers for the first film: even in the first film there was almost no emotion shown when Paul’s dad died, so that is my main criticism with these films
Character changes made to Chani definitely modernizes and sanitizes the material. And I don't think the word concubine was ever mentioned in either of the two movies. It's a similar situation with the northern Fremen non-believers, which was not in the book. In aggregate, the movie Dune is more atheist and more progressive than book Dune, which makes movie Dune less feudal (and less 1965) and closer to our reality. While I get why Dune fans may not like these changes, I think the filmmakers did the best they could, considering that blockbusters have to try to reach the broadest possible audience
Don't forget the changes made to the Baron. I get it, it's the kind of thing that's going to ruffle a lot of feathers these days but come on. It's kind of ironic given what we all known goes on inside the film industry.
The final battle felt very anticlimactic. Honestly, I don't know if you can call it a battle...
that’s the way it feels in the book aswell, paul never even comes close to losing. i dont really like it too much either, but I can’t really think of how else i would end it, it makes sense.
@@jakeleearmy200 Maybe that's the point? I just started reading Dune, so maybe I just misunderstood the meaning
@@--..-...-..-.--.... Yeah it is the point. Paul has control (not that much but his questionable lack of agency over what happens will be explored in the future and has already been show to us in the first arc of the movie with him not wanting to go south) over everything that happens in the climax of the movie, he can se the future and knows he will win, the Emperor is setup to fail the moment Paul revealed himself as Paul Muad'dib and baited him to go to Arrakis. The ending truly wasn't meant to be a battle
@@Prometeu21 ok, I kind of started getting that impression after reflecting on it. I just didn't feel a lot of tension in Dune Part 2 and especially in Dune Part 1. The visuals were incredible in Part 2, but again, I didn't feel any tension or feeling of dread or really any excitement. I'm hoping the books are better
@@--..-...-..-.--.... I loved the movie, but it's understandable that you feel that way. Personally, I think the movie was really tense and had a strong atmosphere of dread, it's just that it isn't in direct conflicts, but in subtle ones. The battles between the Fremen and the Harkonnes/Imperium forces really do feel one-sided, but Paul's struggle to deal with the profecy, his visions of doom and what he will become really do compensate that in my opinion. The true battle of the movie for me is between Paul and the future, and the feeling of dread heavily increases after he drinks the Water of Life and starts playing into the messiah role, still, understandable that you don't feel it that much, I hope you have fun with the books
My biggest gripe with both the first and second movie is moments where I stop seeing channi and start seeing Zendaya. Fundamentally, I think channi was changed from a collectivist, FREMEN character into a modernized, North American individualist character. I might be mistaken, and SPOILERS, but I think Channi was actually MORE in favour of Paul’s arranged marriage with the princess than he was in the books. And it’s because channi isn’t an individualist, modern woman, she’s a fremen. And she believed that the political marriage would serve the fremen better, and it was PAULS more western/individualist character that was more hesitant
Importantly, this is not to say that channi was thrilled by the political marriage, but she put the needs of the fremen before her own in the books, but was much more self interested in the movie (Understandably! But again, understandably from our western perspectives).
Course maybe I misremembered the books this whole time, but I think the character differences for channi hold true beyond this one example.
Changing channi that way, and making the whole fundamentalist vs non fundamentalist sects also robs some of the believability of the fremen. The fremen are made out to be more disciplined and capable fighters than the saudukar because of the brutal, harsh existence of desert living, and because they are UNIFIED in their adherence to their traditions and lifestyles that turn them into such capable fighters. And so in the book they are very unified and disciplined. In the movie, they come across as being much more rambunctious and haphazard, which strips some of the foundation away from the saudukar vs fremen comparison. And Channi is often the least disciplined and unified fremen in the film, which makes her the focal point of that problem for me
Personally I don’t read Chani as individualistic. She believes in her people, willing to die to liberate her world, she didn’t leave Paul at the end of the film cos she was pissed he was marrying she left because she wouldn’t be part of arguably the destruction of her people as they became something she no longer recognised post-revolution. The fremen were unified in the film through their resistance to occupation and obvs the very mass majority were believers in Paul, the odd person like chani not believing but fighting for the people regardless seemed very real and believable to me. She remained a consistent moral centre of the film or at least a consistent perspective that makes the themes of the books so much more explicit. It’s up to you if that explicitness is worth the adaptational change with her character.
Excellent points! I agree. But they had to follow the RULES of 2024…Woke. Notice they inserted - men and women are equals…they showed a scene with a wise leader woman being revered at Sietch Tabr…so that ‘modern audiences’ aka the woke fundamentalists see Fremen as the good guys even as they embark on a billion killing holy war (no use or jihad there).
Shisaki, Chani’s friend was entirely made up because even in a universe where the bene geserit shape all things, we needed more strong female characters. Notice she’s on the movie poster so that we can count, according to the rules and it’s 4 males and 3 females, thank goodness…otherwise it might have been a ratio not according to the rules.
In essence many things from the book were changed. Liet Kynes was the first. Thankfully it is still visually pleasing despite the noise we call soundtrack and woke mandatory elements.
@@luvslogistics1725Ignoring the asinine complaining about "wokeness", which I don't even know where to begin with, the lack of the use of the word "jihad" makes a lot of sense. The meaning of that term in the public consciousness has changed a lot since 9/11, which added a connotation which wasn't there in 1965 when Dune was written.
@@oliviapgWhat do you mean a connotation that didn’t exist? How American are you to think that jihad wasn’t associated with violence and terrorism in the 60’s. In the books Jihad is only associated with the murder of billions in any place it is used.
@@oliviapg the original Dune book has very strong female characters but by today’s laws of the moral tyrants, still not enough women especially women of color
In the first movie "oh were just stopping half way." Yup, that was the point. How did you miss that before watching it?
I personally really loved it and I do think this is the best possible big screen adaptation we could possibly hope for. I understand many of the micro-problems people have with it and as a reader I agree with Jake on the weird Dune shit being toned down. All in all though, I think the changes made were mostly well fleshed out and necessary in order to fit all of the story in a 2.5 hour format targeted not only for the book fans but the general audience. Besides minor issues or alterations though, I think that the movie very well deserves the positive feedback and the praise it gets and that it is so commercially pure and unique that it really feels like all the planets aligned for this one to happen in modern day cinema. Still no definite answer on the stillsuit pooping question tho:(
P.S. My girlfriend said she really loved how the "Ben & Jerry's" witches were portrait.
I thought this was going to be a video about the Westwood Studios classic, Dune II: The Battle for Arrakis based on the link in the other video.
Am I disappointed? A little.
When you have major studios with a huge budget, you have to water-down to appeal to general movie audiences to increase box office numbers. Big studios expect major ROI. Too much weirdness, too many characters, too many subplots confuse general audiences. You don't have the luxury of books to go in-depth on every characters in film so a lot has to be externalized in a simple, easy to understand way.
A lot of your questions especially about Alia are answered in Dune Messiah and Children of Dune.
Regarding to Zendaya...you NEED to read Dune Messiah.
I read the first 4 books of frank Herbert’s dune saga.. heretics of dune and chapter house dune are the last two books
@@luckydawg7176read them! they are fun!
when i first watched the movie i didn't even realize that scene was black and white 😭
I like it. But it wasn’t really clear what the main characters’ objective was. So I was often slightly confused as to what the Fremin were doing.
And I feel like the last half of the movie tried to cram a butt load of stuff from the book and and it was, not really fleshed out
For the most part I think the changes were for the best for an adaptation
This Dune rendition feels almost Shakespearean, which I personally enjoyed. Shakespear with exolosions and aliens and shit.
I can’t help but feel like some of the changes from the book compromised the integrity of Frank Herbert’s vision
you two look like an older paul and chani it's so cute 😇
Dune Part One was instantly one of my favorite movies ever, and the same with Part Two. As a big fan of the book i thought the adaptations was brilliant and preserved the core themes and ideas beautifully. my only disagreement with your guys review is that i think these films are going down as modern classics and will be thought of similar to LotR in a few years. Glad you both enjoyed it!
It was awesome when John Dune said "It's Dune'in time" and Dune'd on those dudes.
One of my main complaints with the Dune movies is that Arrakis almost feels too empty; Arrakeen feels less like a city or more like a location for a big house and there’s not much indication of political interconnections on the planet (other cities, water sellers, etc.)
Honestly, I just really wish they had the dinner scene in Dune Part 1.
his paradise is hell
**Spoilers**
My only real critique is the plothole in the first act. When does paul learn all the stuff about the dessert? How does he get to know chani and how did they fall in love? For me it was a bit abrupt, like after they give him a chance where he should go to through the dessert alone boom he is the leader and in love with chani.
I would have loved to see a bit more of the learning curve and a bit more of the romance of the two. But other than that the movie was awsome. 8/10
He can see the future.
I read the book after Part 1 and loved it so much. I still look back fondly on Part 1 because despite some of its cuts it still felt like a solid adaptation to me. But Part Two really disappointed me. I think your line about admiring but not loving the film is very poignant and reflects how I feel. A lot of my favorite things from the book were excluded and with some of the things they did include, ended up misrepresented. Curious but much less excited for Dune Messiah.
The biggest problem I had with dune 2 was the change in Jessica's trajectory over the course of the story. She becomes a zealot in the movie, while in the book, she remains a strictly opportunistic character, playing into the religion without succumbing to it.
Its funny that you mention the lack of emotional connection/resonance, because thats exactly how I felt at the end of the book. I think Denis did an unbelievable job adapting the story, almost to a fault at times.
I wish they would have stuck closer to the book. Fitting in at the beginning took too long. Otherwise I enjoyed it.
Whens the villeneuve ranking
Big book fan who REALLY disliked the first film! This one BROUGHT it for me though! Really enjoyed paul’s journey, the worm scene was genuinely thrilling, and the slower pace and more human focus benefitted the whole story. Loved it!
Controversial (?) but I didn’t like the additional humour in this version. Sure, there was a bit with Jason Mamoa in the first movie (which seemed particularly out of place) but I loved the dry tone of it, as it was breath of fresh air from every single blockbuster incorporating Whedon humour. Obviously Dune: Part Two doesn’t go THAT extreme, but the scenes of awkward humour when discussing Paul crossing the desert and especially that scene where they were talking about the hiding spot for the Atreides nuclear arsenal really stood out as being responses to the dumb criticisms people had of the first movie being too humourless. Is it too much to ask to have just one blockbuster series that is completely po-faced and doesn’t feel the need to break tension with bad humour? That said, it wasn’t too bad but I hope it’s not something which they do again, personally
yeah it felt very "studio notes"
The books aren’t humourless though? Like off worlders and the fremen having miscommunications occurred a couple of times and in humorous ways. Most of the humour came from stilgar.
It’s beyond the hype. It’s my new favourite film ever made
Paul married her to gain power to the throne. That’s all. Chani is Paul’s true love and he will marry her through a fremen marriage ceremony. They will have kids. One of those kids will be even more powerful than Paul. But the ending of the movie sets up a great moment for the next movie.
so many dogs
I wanted more world-building & establishing shots around the emperor. Never read the books, but it felt like whenever they cut to him, the scenes coulda been filmed at Walkin's house..
I've been in a three-day argument on a CZcams comment about whether New Dune is better than Dune 1985.
Honestly, if anyone truly thinks the goofy white-washed exposition-riddled Lynch version is better than this trilogy, seek help. Not even Lynch took full credit for that mess.
Yes.
I understand the ‘emotional resonance’ comment when compared to LOTR. But, I’d counter that it’s the price for a sense of realism. I love LOTR, but the films were pulpy in their use of things like the Wilhelm Scream and the ‘I guess meat’s back on the menu, boys’ dialogue. So Orc society has a robust restaurant scene?
On rewatches, those touches of general pop culture take me out of the film.
Whereas Dune is 100% cruel, cold, dazzling, and true in its world building.
It's interesting to hear these movies described as faithful adaptations. My impression was that they didn't capture the spirit of the books at all. The moment when Duncan Idaho, in the first one, yells out to Paul and hugs him when they land was so ... out of place. The Duke, in the book, is depicted as a strict, hierarchical man who cared very deeply about protocol. That interaction was too... American? Modern? It was familiar and it very much shouldn't be, especially not in public like that.
To me, the whole movie, I haven't seen the second one, is full of oversights like that. It felt jarring. There was a lot of scenes which in the book were dominated by the internal monologue of a character that... I knew what was going on when I watched it, but it was pretty obvious to me that someone coming fresh was missing a lot of exposition.
One thing I really liked about the Lynch version was the inclusion of the internal monologues. I thought it was so cool and I don't know. The new Dune movies didn't feel like Dune to me. It didn't feel like a Frank Herbert story. It didn't feel like this was a story from the guy who penned "The Jesus Incident".
Am I the only one who hates what they did to Chani's character?
It's just like they setup a romance and tear it down so fast it seemed pointless to even set it up.
They’re not going to flip the protagonists.
Good stuff guys. Thanks and hope you feel better. 🐕🐶🐕
I read the book and the biggest problem for me is it felt like they compressed time progression too much where we didn’t really get to see Paul ever get challenged except by chani. big part of the book is paul constantly having to defend his prophecy and slowly becoming the messiah after years and years of rebel activity. The fremen culture shown in the movie was just a little flat and thematically lacked a lot of Herbert’s most important messages like the ecology side and the respect for the dead. The one scene in the movie that really triggered me as a huge misstep is when the fremen burned the dead harkonnen corpses after the final battle instead of reclaiming their water…. fremen would NEVER be wasting water like that. Also the movie never got into how the spice is made and changed Paul’s plan for holding the spice hostage. In the book it was much more of a suicide mission and risked the entire fremen way of life.
I give the movie an 8/10 as a film because it still was a major cinematic spectacle and achievement and beautifully shot with top-notch sound design.
Tried watching this but only lasted a couple of minutes. The upwards inflection and vocal fry is killing me.
People at my theatre laughed out loud at Zendaya in the “I’ll take your daughter’s hand in marriage” scene.
I think this review needed more dogs