Dune part 2: the spoilers must flow (Spoilers for the movies)

[Wilbur]

Danny Sullivan ranks the Dune books by un-filmability:

https://defector.com/dune-novels-ranked-by-unfilmability

[Relic]

Quote

I went into Part Two expecting big things from these sequences—this was, to me, the crux of the difficulty of a faithful adaptation of Dune on film. How would Villeneuve show us, visually, Lady Jessica’s Reverend Mother awakening and the innumerable, contingent branching paths of Paul’s future? The answer is, he doesn’t! Villeneuve punts on these sequences, declining to take us into their minds save for a few underwhelming shots of Paul’s vision of following a woman through a field of corpses. This creates major problems in the back half of Part Two because Paul’s new abilities are underexplained, making both his motivations and hesitations hard to parse. 

This guy gets my problems with this visually stunning movie.

https://defector.com/dune-novels-ranked-by-unfilmability

 

 

[Relic]

9 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

Danny Sullivan ranks the Dune books by un-filmability:

https://defector.com/dune-novels-ranked-by-unfilmability

I think the Google algorithm has been showing us some similar stuff ...

[Lord Varys]

9 hours ago, Jace, Extat said:

Ah, Count Fenring. A genetic eunich and the Emperor's only friend...

"In this I do you a favor, Your Majesty." 

Respect, Varys. Respect. That's a sublime deep cut. 

Get it? Deep. Cut. 

 

Hihi, I do understand. It is really a pity the guy was missing yet again (the TV show version was a joke), especially since they really elaborated on the Kwisatz Haderach contingency bloodlines with Feyd-Rautha. Was surprised how close to the source material the Giedi Prime Feyd-Rautha scenes were, right down to the actually superfluous inclusion of the saving of the Harkonnen bloodline (in FH's books that plot is only kind of referenced when we get to Hwi Noree's ancestry centuries later), and Lady Margot was great ... so why not have the guy there as Shaddam's seemingly awkward errand boy who then shows Feyd-Rautha he isn't the deadliest guy in town? And then later give him his empathetic moment with Paul.

The character isn't exactly crucial, but conceptually he adds another layer to the whole breeding program plot.

Thinking about it - the Fenrings could also have kind of featured in the first movie since Margot gives Jessica the warning there.

It is also sad that Thufir Hawat completely disappeared (yet again), that they failed to include some foreshadowing for Duncan Idaho's return (which must happen in the next movie if it is going to be a remotely faithful adaptation of DM), and that the Liet-Chani connection was completely ignored. It was clear in part one that they wanted to reveal Liet-Kynes role with the Fremen since there are, 2-3 scenes, I think, where her special role is hinted at. And her being Chani's mother would have greatly helped to establish her skepticism about savior stuff, etc. as Liet was promising a slow but certain transformation of Arrakis through science.

I do expect that some such scenes were scripted/shot but cut for not exactly great reasons.

The pacing of part two isn't all that good, focusing too much on Paul/Chani without giving other characters time to develop. Best example for that is the scene where Jessica lays the groundwork for Paul's water of life trial, the southern journey montage, and then Paul's completely random decision to go to that temple and ask for the water. Scenes between him and Jessicalia were missing there, I think, or should have been written. He was afraid of trying that, and there was little to no talk between him and Jessicalia since shortly after her trial.

The weird take on Alia also feels strange. They could easily have had a small time jump between the movies (say, by way of finishing part one with Jessica becoming a Reverend Mother) or also by way of a time jump within the movies by way of concentrating a bit more on Kaitain/Giedi Prime or longer campaigns on Arrakis. Alia's confrontation with the Baron is one of the most crucial and also most iconic scenes of the novel (and in all the adaptations so far), not to mention that it is also the groundwork for her later plot on CoD. I know that Villeneuve doesn't want to adapt CoD, but if somebody else continues the series I think a crucial tidbit of backstory is missing there.

 

[Heartofice]

 

Quote

I went into Part Two expecting big things from these sequences—this was, to me, the crux of the difficulty of a faithful adaptation of Dune on film. How would Villeneuve show us, visually, Lady Jessica’s Reverend Mother awakening and the innumerable, contingent branching paths of Paul’s future? The answer is, he doesn’t! Villeneuve punts on these sequences, declining to take us into their minds save for a few underwhelming shots of Paul’s vision of following a woman through a field of corpses. This creates major problems in the back half of Part Two because Paul’s new abilities are underexplained, making both his motivations and hesitations hard to pars

I agree the movie doesn't really deal very well with this issue at all. Having said that, I don't think it was the key priority for the movie. The main focus seems to be centred around the religious aspect and maybe I am fine with that. There are a number of themes within the book and I don't see how this movie could do all of them justice, so I think he picked one and focused on that. 

If they do Messiah then that might be an opportunity to delve into this aspect. I think it would be perfectly possible to do it justice.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

1 hour ago, Relic said:

This guy gets my problems with this visually stunning movie.

https://defector.com/dune-novels-ranked-by-unfilmability

That "woman" the big text refers to is Lady Jessica. Visual storytelling, Sucka!

And though Villeneuve doesn't "show us", Paul tells us after drinking the water of life. I've certainly been critical of the verbosity of the script but in this case it works. 

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Best example for that is the scene where Jessica lays the groundwork for Paul's water of life trial, the southern journey montage, and then Paul's completely random decision to go to that temple and ask for the water. Scenes between him and Jessicalia were missing there, I think, or should have been written. He was afraid of trying that, and there was little to no talk between him and Jessicalia since shortly after her trial.

You mean the talk where she explicitly tells him "You must drink the water of life"? This shit's tha BOMB, son!

Paul's decision to go south was prompted by the destruction of Sietch Tabr and the Harkonnens "striking all over the north". Which means either:

a) We need to to take this to a whole other level

or

b) Shit just got real

Either way, not so random. 

[Lord Varys]

21 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Either way, not so random. 

Sure, but it is random that he 1) does it the south, 2) does it exactly where Jessicalia sets up things for him. The groundwork scene kind of needs a 'do it there' scene, or else the groundwork scene feels as disjointed as it is now. At this point he doesn't see the future in great detail.

Earlier scenes establish Paul's fear of becoming the tool/figurehead of the Fremen fanatics in the south, but not that he fears the water of life ceremony for similar reasons. It might kill him, sure, but knowing stuff doesn't turn him into a religious icon. Revealing what he knows and acting like an omniscient savior does.

The sequence there is strangely reminiscent of the Lynch version where things are equally disjointed. The average viewer doesn't understand why this whole thing is necessary nor what it means. I mean, there are many Paul-Chani scenes, but they should have talked more about Kwisatz Haderach stuff. What does it mean for Paul to drink the stuff? We don't know, just as we don't know what it meant for Jessicalia. Some old woman says 'abomination' once, but what does that mean? Jessicalia becomes a kind of weirdo freak after the ceremony, but we don't really know why.

Also, of course, playing up the Harkonnens as this big threat to the Fremen undermines their agency. They have been always in control of their planet, they are the best fighters in the known universe. Nobody ever colonized that planet nor did the Harkonnens ever gain the upper hand over the Fremen via 'superior technology'. The analogous book sequence to the destruction of Sietch Tabr is the much later Sardaukar raid of the place which leads to the death of Paul's first son by Chani and the capture of Alia. That works because there are only women and children there are the Sardaukar outnumber them.

[polishgenius]

15 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Sure, but it is random that he 1) does it the south, 2) does it exactly where Jessicalia sets up things for him. The groundwork scene kind of needs a 'do it there' scene, or else the groundwork scene feels as disjointed as it is now. At this point he doesn't see the future in great detail.

 

 

Does it really? I really don't think it takes any kind of stretch at all to infer that Paul knew where his mother had been working and wanted to do it there. 

 

13 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The whole Harkonnen plot only makes sense in a context where the Atreides have formed an alternative power center House Corrino cannot possibly integrate into their system. But that isn't the case

 

How can you live in the world and dismiss the idea that even clever people can do really stupid things. It doesn't depend on the Atreides doing that: it depends on the Emperor believing that they might have. 

22 hours ago, Kalbear said:

He also mentions that the Jihad would happen no matter what, even if he dies. That said, there's some references to this being, well, another interesting storyline that would be VERY different than the books. Some speculation here.

  Reveal hidden contents

The basic gist is that Leto (in Children of Dune) chides Paul for not having the courage to do the Golden Path himself, and that was the terrible choice he didn't make. The narrow path he chooses is the only possible way for him to avoid the Golden path. If that's the case, then there is no need for Paul to have kids; he's going to be the God-Emperor himself. That'd be another interesting story that would also make people angry, but would be fascinating to see. 

 

 

A further thought in this line of theory is that in the film, in the scene where he finds out and reveals that they're Harkonnens, he follows it with 'so that's how we win. By being Harkonnens' (I think. I've only seen it once, but I'm pretty sure that's the line). There's no equivalent moment in the book, right? 

I don't know what that would mean exactly but if I haven't misremembered all that, it does fit in with the thinking that Villeneuve is deliberately planning an even darker turn for Paul than the books gave. 

[Lord Varys]

10 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

Does it really? I really don't think it takes any kind of stretch at all to infer that Paul knew where his mother had been working and wanted to do it there. 

It isn't all that big a thing, just something that feels disjointed to me. There is serious lack of worldbuilding/backstory, which is strange since that's an adaptation spanning over 5 hours combined.

10 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

How can you live in the world and dismiss the idea that even clever people can do really stupid things. It doesn't depend on the Atreides doing that: it depends on the Emperor believing that they might have. 

From what I remember from the novel and the appendix it is that Duke Leto was both very popular in the Landsraad as well as kind of (unintentionally) mimicking the Sardaukar thing with the Atreides troops. Shaddam faces a serious succession problem due to the fact that his wife, unlike Jessica, gave him only daughters.

There is certainly motivation for Shaddam to dislike or fear Leto as a rival ... but doing what he did there is clearly over the top since there were other, obvious alternatives (binding the Atreides to House Corrino via marriages - he could have even thrown two daughters on them, one for Leto, one for Paul), even more so as the movie turns Mohiam into the architect of the Harkonnen plan. Which is a clear diversion from the novel and also causes problem in the movie continuity as Mohiam did test Paul only after she decided to destroy House Atreides completely. What was the point of that when Paul was already a dead man/animal walking/crawling?

In the book it is clear that she extends some help to Jessica and Paul via Margot precisely because she does not want the Atreides bloodline to die out.

10 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

A further thought in this line of theory is that in the film, in the scene where he finds out and reveals that they're Harkonnens, he follows it with 'so that's how we win. By being Harkonnens' (I think. I've only seen it once, but I'm pretty sure that's the line). There's no equivalent moment in the book, right?

Not exactly, but the Harkonnen thing certainly makes him feel tainted for a while. Ditto with Alia.

10 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

I don't know what that would mean exactly but if I haven't misremembered all that, it does fit in with the thinking that Villeneuve is deliberately planning an even darker turn for Paul than the books gave. 

I think he gave him a cheap cop-out with the 'the great houses don't accept your ascension to the throne' - which was a ridiculous line, what do they want to do, risk the destruction of the spice or that the Fremen cut them off for good? - as it gives him and the Fremen a pretext for their 'holy war'. In the book there is literally none. Those madmen just run amok and he can do nothing to stop them. And the point of the crusade is to force the universe to worship the living god of the Fremen, not to seize or consolidate power. They also set up the corrupt clergy we see in DM.

[Leofric]

3 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

That "woman" the big text refers to is Lady Jessica. Visual storytelling, Sucka!

And though Villeneuve doesn't "show us", Paul tells us after drinking the water of life. I've certainly been critical of the verbosity of the script but in this case it works. 

You mean the talk where she explicitly tells him "You must drink the water of life"? This shit's tha BOMB, son!

Paul's decision to go south was prompted by the destruction of Sietch Tabr and the Harkonnens "striking all over the north". Which means either:

a) We need to to take this to a whole other level

or

b) Shit just got real

Either way, not so random. 

The attack on Sietch Tabr triggers him to drink the Water of Life because, as he says in the movie, he had not foreseen the attack in his visions, it took him by surprise.   I've seen speculation that he didn't see it because it was planned by Feyd-Ruatha who had almost as much potential to be the "chosen one" as Paul through the breeding program.  He drank the water to strengthen his visions of the future.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

3 hours ago, Leofric said:

The attack on Sietch Tabr triggers him to drink the Water of Life because, as he says in the movie, he had not foreseen the attack in his visions, it took him by surprise.   I've seen speculation that he didn't see it because it was planned by Feyd-Ruatha who had almost as much potential to be the "chosen one" as Paul through the breeding program.  He drank the water to strengthen his visions of the future.

Jamis also tells him he "must drink the water of life" in his vision. This is immediately before he goes south.

-

I found another continuity error and boy is it a humdinger, by god. 

Irulan, in her "10,191: 8th comment" journal entry refers to "sand storms a thousand miles wide" when talking about the southern hemisphere of Arrakis.  

"A thousand miles wide"

"Miles"? WTF, "miles"?!?

Also, If it's still 10,191, how did Gurney Halleck's hair grow out that quickly? He had a buzz cut in the first film. His mop should be easily a year's worth of growth. 

[Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II]

Going today to rewatch it in IMAX, this movie has so much rewatch value. 

Edited March 7 by Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II

[Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II]

So after the rewatch I gotta say I really love the sand worm climb and final assault on Arakeen even more. It felt rushed when I first saw it but really liked the details, especially the ground assault. On the other hand the Chani Desert Spring Prophecy subplot felt like they just wanted to give Zendaya something to do with that scene,didn’t feel right second time around. I also love Timothee and Javiers acting - best performances of the movie IMO. I think now I’ll wait for streaming for the next watch but really excited for Part 3 already

[Luzifer's right hand]

On a random side note I just read that David J. Peterson was involved in the creation of the language used in the film.

I remember him as a fan at a worldcon who was enthusiastic about creating languages some time before he got involved with GoT IIRC. 

His filmography is crazy at this point. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_J._Peterson

[Ran]

This article on Peterson's work is quite good, not least because it is well-researched and recognizes some points where his version of consistency leads him to deviate his created language from what the original creators obviously intended (dracarys and dragons, obvious survivals of specific Arabic words ten thousand years in the future)

[Luzifer's right hand]

13 minutes ago, Ran said:

This article on Peterson's work is quite good, not least because it is well-researched and recognizes some points where his version of consistency leads him to deviate his created language from what the original creators obviously intended (dracarys and dragons, obvious survivals of specific Arabic words ten thousand years in the future)

Thanks.

Sardaukar and Chakobsa sound magnificent at least to me.

[A wilding]

Been spending a few days mulling over the film and discussing it. It was a really impressive visual and auditory spectacle. Even the ridiculous speed of the worms worked. Some of the changes from the book also worked really well (Paul and Jessica being at odds, Chani as the voice of reason increasingly backing away from Paul). I could accept the junking of most of my favourite subplot of Feyd-Rautha vs the Baron (it might well turn up in an extended version anyway). There was a lot of good stuff. And yet we both walked out of the cinema disappointed.

I think it comes down to a general feeling that the last part of the film was weak, especially in plot. The Emperor was not so much weak as a nonentity. Apparently the Reverend Mother Mohiam wanted to wipe out the Atreides all along?! The Sardaukar were suddenly deemphasised (I think the only time they were named was when Paul said to kill the ones in the throne room). Paul's pre-battle planning over a hasty sketch map ("you attack from this side, you attack from that side") was silly, especially as the actual plan was to blast a hole in the shield wall to let the storm in and then shock the defenders by attacking on worms. Plus the use of the nukes needed to be better explained and justified, especially as they did obviously kill some Sardaukar. Paul's sudden threat to destroy the spice by using the nukes felt off, why did he even make it, especially knowing that the Great Houses were going to turn him down? Etc.

Final gripe. I really hate villains who randomly kill minions just to show us how evil they are. I might just about have accepted Rabban doing it, since he was portrayed as only borderline competent and with anger management issues, but not all the Harkonnens. The trope was subverted as long ago as The Empire Strikes Back for heaven's sake!

But I guess we will probably go and see part 3.

[SeanF]

On 3/5/2024 at 8:16 PM, Kalbear said:

Nah. Both in the movie and the book he knows that his ascendancy will be anything but peaceful. He is threatening the use of the nukes (in the movie) knowing that the response will be what it is, because he can entirely see the future here. He knows exactly what will happen with this course of action. 

Presumably if he didn't threaten with the nukes something else would happen; probably an invasion of Arrakis itself. 

I'm more and more inclined to agree. An interesting parallel from the first and the second movie - in the first movie there's a sequence where we see Paul going full-on ninja against Sardukar stabbing all sorts of people and wearing these really cool-ass modern stillsuits. In Dune 2 we see Chani do the exact same sequence of moves and poses against the Sardukar in her battle. Chani starts the story of Dune by asking as the Harkonnen leave who will oppress the Fremen next, with a great jumpshot of Paul in the very next shot. 

There are a bunch of differences between the book and the movie that make me think this may be going...well, into a very different place than the books. Spoilers for the next books follow.

  Hide contents

Chani not being pregnant or in love with Paul (she drops her blue ribbon, the signifier in Fremen of love) is one, but the biggest one is that Paul does not tell Irulan that she will be his bride but he will never father children of her and that Chani will be his consort is a huge deal to me. To me, this is Paul knowingly choosing the path where Chani actively opposes him and potentially ends him. Obviously that would be a very different story! And presumably that would also mean no Leto, no Golden Path, nothing like that. Paul telling Chani over and over how he is being set up as the messiah but he isn't one - and then choosing that path and pissing her off so much - is another sign of this conscious pushing of her. 

I could see her being the ultimate user of the Stone Burners against Paul, for instance. 

I think, conceptually, I really love it. I like Chani both being used this way and having a lot more action in the story, I like Paul fighting in some way against his fate and the long prophecy, I like them illustrating this is just another means of oppression of the Fremen...but it goes on trackless ground if they go this way, and I can see a lot of purists getting real pissed off. It could also be really shitty! It's not like Dune Messiah was a particular masterpiece anyway, but diverting significantly and doing his own thing may not be great. 

And, of course, doing it that way pretty much kills any other stories down the road - at least ones based on the novels. 

 

I enjoyed the Chani storyline, too.  I agree that it would make sense for her to be an antagonist to Paul.

Edited March 7 by SeanF

[SeanF]

3 hours ago, A wilding said:

Been spending a few days mulling over the film and discussing it. It was a really impressive visual and auditory spectacle. Even the ridiculous speed of the worms worked. Some of the changes from the book also worked really well (Paul and Jessica being at odds, Chani as the voice of reason increasingly backing away from Paul). I could accept the junking of most of my favourite subplot of Feyd-Rautha vs the Baron (it might well turn up in an extended version anyway). There was a lot of good stuff. And yet we both walked out of the cinema disappointed.

I think it comes down to a general feeling that the last part of the film was weak, especially in plot. The Emperor was not so much weak as a nonentity. Apparently the Reverend Mother Mohiam wanted to wipe out the Atreides all along?! The Sardaukar were suddenly deemphasised (I think the only time they were named was when Paul said to kill the ones in the throne room). Paul's pre-battle planning over a hasty sketch map ("you attack from this side, you attack from that side") was silly, especially as the actual plan was to blast a hole in the shield wall to let the storm in and then shock the defenders by attacking on worms. Plus the use of the nukes needed to be better explained and justified, especially as they did obviously kill some Sardaukar. Paul's sudden threat to destroy the spice by using the nukes felt off, why did he even make it, especially knowing that the Great Houses were going to turn him down? Etc.

Final gripe. I really hate villains who randomly kill minions just to show us how evil they are. I might just about have accepted Rabban doing it, since he was portrayed as only borderline competent and with anger management issues, but not all the Harkonnens. The trope was subverted as long ago as The Empire Strikes Back for heaven's sake!

But I guess we will probably go and see part 3.

Killing people for shits and giggles is part of the Harkonnen modus operandi in the novel.

But, I accept it’s unrealistic.  It actually makes it safer for people to plot against you, rather than remain loyal.

[Larry of the Lawn]

45 minutes ago, SeanF said:

I enjoyed the Chani storyline, too.  I agree that it would make sense for her to be an antagonist to Paul.

Yeah, I think it was probably the most efficient way to get some of Paul's interiority into the film, always an issue with adaptations where the source material is so weighted with a main character's internal thoughts.