Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Full disclosure: I wasn't wowed by the first movie. It was fine. Not great. Not terrible. It was fine.
DUNE 2 is much better in all respects. The pacing is better. The action is better. The direction is better. The dialogue is better. It is visually stunning, and even the music is much better. The acting is better --- with particular standouts Rebecca Ferguson and Javier Bardem. Ferguson is both sympathetic and scary. Bardem reminded me of Anthony Quinn in Lawrence of Arabia. He steals every scene he is in.
There are really only two weak performances in the movie: Zendaya. At times she is magnificent. But in a couple of other pivotal scenes, she comes across as a spoiled California teen who is complaining that the barista got her order wrong. She seems to forget what kind of movie she is in and thinks she is on the CW. But honestly, the fault of that goes as much to the director as Zendaya. A good director would catch stuff like that, take her aside, and tell her what is needed. I guess that didn't happen here. She is also the only person with a teen American accent in the entire movie. She is playing a desert warrior from a desert warrior culture, and every other desert warrior has a very distinct accent, while Zendaya sounds like she is on her way to the L.A. Galleria.
The other weak spot, painful as it is to admit, is Christopher Walken. The guy is a great actor, but not once did I believe him as the Emperor here. Every time he is onscreen, you're thinking, "Hey! It's Christopher Walken!" Again, not entirely his fault. Walken has become an icon unto himself at this point. The director should have fixed this. He didn't.
As a fan of the books I was put off by the large number of departures, but after thinking about it some more I came to understand why those choices were made.
I agree that many actors were underused, like Christopher Walken.
Zendaya's accent, or lack of, was jarring at first, but I thought her performance was believable.
Javier Bardem was perfectly cast and was definitely the MVP.
Overall I enjoyed the movie despite the length; it had visual flair, the pacing was good, but overall the film felt more like an interpretation than an adaptation.
My major nitpicks:
Spoiler
For example, having Jessica talk to Alia is a way to introduce the religious element and subvert the savior narrative which the other adaptations ignored or did poorly. However there are a few decisions that left me scratching my head:
Jessica, not Paul, giving water to the dead?
Jessica not knowing what the Water of Life is?
Not casting a toddler Alia.
Compressing the entire story to be within the gestation period of a human infant made very little sense. The story worked better if this happened over a few years.
In the climactic final duel I could've sworn that Paul was stabbed on the left side, but a few frames later the knife is on the right side. It was also not clear how he won the fight.
Not including the Spacing Guild, at least to have them around at the end to send the warships away. Starting the Jihad as the planet was surrounded was ridiculous.
Yeah, I found the absence of the Spacing Guild to be a MAJOR omission. The relevance of the spice doesn't make much sense without them.
The biggest thing that kept bugging me throughout the movie: Bits of anachronistic dialogue. It's a peeve of mine. Dialogue should have a flavor. There is a reason the dialogue in movies LORD OF THE RINGS rings true. No one uses words like "okay" or "guys." But characters in DUNE do. And despite their silly refusal to use the word "jihad" they kept mis-using the term "fundamentalist." All in all, I thought the dialogue could have used a second pass by an editor --- although it was MUCH improved from the first movie, where all too many characters kept talking to the audience instead of each other.
I have read the book several times, so I had no trouble following the story. But I wonder: Could someone who had never read the book make sense of it? Honest question. Anyone out there care to comment?
Full disclosure: I wasn't wowed by the first movie. It was fine. Not great. Not terrible. It was fine.
DUNE 2 is much better in all respects. The pacing is better. The action is better. The direction is better. The dialogue is better. It is visually stunning, and even the music is much better. The acting is better --- with particular standouts Rebecca Ferguson and Javier Bardem. Ferguson is both sympathetic and scary. Bardem reminded me of Anthony Quinn in Lawrence of Arabia. He steals every scene he is in.
He does remind you of Anthony Quinn! And he really conveys the feeling of genuinely idealistic fervor...and in kind of a endearing way (how do you make a religious fundamentalist seem endearing? I dunno...but he did it). I've only seen this actor otherwise play a scary murderer and a charming Cuban musician, and he makes you really believe he's them. He deserves his awards.
Quote:
There are really only two weak performances in the movie: Zendaya. At times she is magnificent. But in a couple of other pivotal scenes, she comes across as a spoiled California teen who is complaining that the barista got her order wrong. She seems to forget what kind of movie she is in and thinks she is on the CW. But honestly, the fault of that goes as much to the director as Zendaya. A good director would catch stuff like that, take her aside, and tell her what is needed. I guess that didn't happen here. She is also the only person with a teen American accent in the entire movie. She is playing a desert warrior from a desert warrior culture, and every other desert warrior has a very distinct accent, while Zendaya sounds like she is on her way to the L.A. Galleria.
There were several verbal anachronisms I heard ("anachronism" isn't really the right word, you know what I mean), but hers were most blatant. She didn't really act like someone with the responses of a Fremen warrior, but yeah, 'way too petulant. Her role here was different from the way Chani is portrayed in the novels. Yeah, I know she was supposed to display the more skeptical northern view, as well as the fear that a messiah can't be a husband. At some point, however, the practical fatalism of harsh desert existence should have kicked in and she should have been able to say, "Whose life isn't tough?" That's writing, that's direction, and that was deliberate...but a bad decision in my opinion.
Quote:
The other weak spot, painful as it is to admit, is Christopher Walken. The guy is a great actor, but not once did I believe him as the Emperor here. Every time he is onscreen, you're thinking, "Hey! It's Christopher Walken!" Again, not entirely his fault. Walken has become an icon unto himself at this point. The director should have fixed this. He didn't.
I didn't feel any acting out of Walken, and frankly, if Walken had acted as Walken acts, it would have been wrong for the emperor. Who would have been better? Let's discuss.
Last edited by Ralph_Kirk; 03-03-2024 at 02:09 PM..
Yeah, I found the absence of the Spacing Guild to be a MAJOR omission. The relevance of the spice doesn't make much sense without them.
Bam, yes. I had to explain that to my wife (who saw the first movie, but doesn't know the lore). Without spice, there is no space travel or commerce...like the essentiality of oil to our present day global commerce. I don't recall it being explained in the first movie, either.
It didn't need too much of that...no need to go into all the aspects of the Spacing Guild, which would then get into the use of Mentats and a lot of other lore I thought was wisely removed for a movie adaptation.
Denis has stated that he sees his movies more as visual epics than actual literary stories, and I certainly love them as "motion illustrations" of stories I already know.
But for sure, there should have been more explanation of why spice was so darned important.
I didn't feel any acting out of Walken, and frankly, if Walken had acted as Walken acts, it would have been wrong for the emperor. Who would have been better? Let's discuss.
Mads Mikkelsen
Gary Oldman
Lance Reddick (RIP)
Ralph Fiennes
Christoph Walz
Anthony Hopkins
Charles Dance
Bam, yes. I had to explain that to my wife (who saw the first movie, but doesn't know the lore). Without spice, there is no space travel or commerce...like the essentiality of oil to our present day global commerce. I don't recall it being explained in the first movie, either.
It didn't need too much of that...no need to go into all the aspects of the Spacing Guild, which would then get into the use of Mentats and a lot of other lore I thought was wisely removed for a movie adaptation.
There was a VERY brief explanation in the first movie, but it wasn't emphasized. If you blinked, you missed it. You also saw the Mentats doing what they do a scene or two, but without having read the book, you probably had no idea what was going on --- and both of the major Mentat characters in the movies (Thufir Hawat and Piter deVries) disappear from the story. Yeah, they died, but I actually had to go back and remember how because they were both treated in such an offhand fashion.
Even though I enjoyed these movies, I still don't think the perfect film version of DUNE has been done. This one was really, really good, but still lacking, even at nearly six total hours of screen time.
To really do this story justice, it really ought to be a 10-12 hour HBO series akin to GAME OF THRONES.
I will be curious to see how they handle the next book. I read DUNE MESSIAH ages ago and found it intensely boring.
Even though I enjoyed these movies, I still don't think the perfect film version of DUNE has been done. This one was really, really good, but still lacking, even at nearly six total hours of screen time.
To really do this story justice, it really ought to be a 10-12 hour HBO series akin to GAME OF THRONES.
I will be curious to see how they handle the next book. I read DUNE MESSIAH ages ago and found it intensely boring.
Haven't seen the 2nd yet but looking forward to it. I liked the more "atmospheric" treatment of the first installment. It was cinematically beautiful, impressionistic, and moody IMHO. Some aspects and details of the 84 release never sat right. I LOVE the new release's ornithopters! Terrible, elegant, lethal dragonflies? Perfect. I want one! I expect part 2 won't be nearly as impressionistic. Too much action and consequence to get through. I hope they spend a little more on the interesting litanies, rituals, and mantras various characters use. Such interesting cultural aspects.
I read the original Dune a couple of times many years ago. There was so much novel meat to everything it was a feast. The sequels just didn't work for me. Too bogged down in morality & religion; pedantic.
Just got out it. I probably should have stayed home. It's a visual feast for the eyes but yet again, I didn't understand a thing going on. I've never read the Dune books so I was lost in the first movie too.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
