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

[Clueless Northman]

Wouldn't be a "robot comeback" since there never was a robot empire to begin with, just humans going full luddite and deciding to destroy machines for some religion's sake.

IIRC indeed there were some variations of faceless dancers and other weird genetic furries coming from outer space, though it's never been made clear who they were - some offspring from mankind going to unknown space after Leto II's death, but other than that, nothing precise.

You posti the Tleilaxu deep space empire due to the Matres' hatred of Tleilax and their bloody crusade wiping out all traces of Tleilax across the old "known universe"? I always assumed it was due to them being a mix of Bene Gesserit, remnants of Leto's female army, and surviving exiled female Tleilax - the latter having a huge reason to be pissed off.

Whatever, I always find it interesting and weird, because Leto II's goal was to have made sure no unified power could ever control mankind, yet here we have a supposedly massive force that allegedly is ruling over most of the outer unknow space, and seems to come back to hit the (obviously way smaller) galactic core.

[mcbigski]

10 hours ago, Werthead said:

No, they made all that shit up.

Frank Herbert was probably building up to the reveal of a Tleilaxu empire in deep space that was the real "great enemy," based on some of the stuff in the books. A robot comeback was not really on the cards.

Going to reread the last two before worldcon.  Though a tleiaxu empire out of guild space seems a little off.

Unless it was the Ixians that built a Navigator substitute?  Been a while.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 hours ago, mcbigski said:

Going to reread the last two before worldcon.  Though a tleiaxu empire out of guild space seems a little off.

Unless it was the Ixians that built a Navigator substitute?  Been a while.

The Ixians built the Navigation computer that made guild navigators superfluous.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

You know, after the ASOIAF adaptations, the Witcher series, and hell, even Wheel of Time, I thought: it must be me. I must be incapable of appreciating or even liking adaptations of stories I like.

These two Dune movies have shown me that's not true. Dune is one of my most beloved book series of all time, and these movies were phenomenal. Even when it strays from the source material, I feel like it's doing it to preserve Herbert's vision. Sure, I really wanted to that dinner scene in Dune Part 1--I remember just loving that whole section in the book. Or Momoa being cast as Duncan Idaho--I like Momoa, but he strikes me more as a Gurney Halleck type than a Duncan Idaho. But something in the way Villeneuve captures him just works well.

The ending of Dune Part 2 with Chani also worked for me. Her response to Paul was such a smart way to be faithful to Herbert's view of Paul: a hero that becomes a messiah is a bad thing. I was surprised to find myself siding with Chani at the end of the film. I've always loved Paul and believed he tried to do his best despite the horrendous consequences. I still believe that about him, but Chani's role in the story makes me think he is so short-sighted, which is obviously ironic given his foresight. 

I think removing the first Leto II from this part of the story helped with that. I just started rereading the book (it's been over a decade so the details are murky), but I believe the full-scale war already had started in the book when Leto II dies in the novel. But in the film, when Sietch Tabr is attacked, if Leto II had been born and died there, it gives the audience more reason to side with Paul. By removing that plot, Paul becomes a bit darker of a character we're not sure if we can trust.

Either way--I'm in awe of these movies. I'm so glad I can enjoy a well-done adaptation. 

[Werthead]

Space Gentrifier Paul Atreides! With his trust fund full of nukes!

[mcbigski]

On 4/22/2024 at 7:06 PM, Centrist Simon Steele said:

You know, after the ASOIAF adaptations, the Witcher series, and hell, even Wheel of Time, I thought: it must be me. I must be incapable of appreciating or even liking adaptations of stories I like.

These two Dune movies have shown me that's not true. Dune is one of my most beloved book series of all time, and these movies were phenomenal. Even when it strays from the source material, I feel like it's doing it to preserve Herbert's vision. Sure, I really wanted to that dinner scene in Dune Part 1--I remember just loving that whole section in the book. Or Momoa being cast as Duncan Idaho--I like Momoa, but he strikes me more as a Gurney Halleck type than a Duncan Idaho. But something in the way Villeneuve captures him just works well.

The ending of Dune Part 2 with Chani also worked for me. Her response to Paul was such a smart way to be faithful to Herbert's view of Paul: a hero that becomes a messiah is a bad thing. I was surprised to find myself siding with Chani at the end of the film. I've always loved Paul and believed he tried to do his best despite the horrendous consequences. I still believe that about him, but Chani's role in the story makes me think he is so short-sighted, which is obviously ironic given his foresight. 

I think removing the first Leto II from this part of the story helped with that. I just started rereading the book (it's been over a decade so the details are murky), but I believe the full-scale war already had started in the book when Leto II dies in the novel. But in the film, when Sietch Tabr is attacked, if Leto II had been born and died there, it gives the audience more reason to side with Paul. By removing that plot, Paul becomes a bit darker of a character we're not sure if we can trust.

Either way--I'm in awe of these movies. I'm so glad I can enjoy a well-done adaptation. 

I didn't overall like clown Stilgar though.  I chuckled most of the time at his comedic bits, but it was almost too much like the National Lampoon Doon - the scene where Paul sees IIRC the pretzel sign, and the Liet Kynes analog remembers the scripture that says something like "His hearing will be excellent, as for his eyes, we don't don't, he may wear glasses"  And then the Kynes analog says "Even this is consistent with the legend!"

[Lord Varys]

On 4/21/2024 at 6:13 PM, Clueless Northman said:

Wouldn't be a "robot comeback" since there never was a robot empire to begin with, just humans going full luddite and deciding to destroy machines for some religion's sake.

The Dune Encyclopedia has a nice and much better alternative version of the Butlerian fanatics as a religious conflict which is instigated when some man-machines in a culture ran effectively by thinking machines in the sense that many decisions are handed to computers and such decide to abort the unborn child of Jehane Butler. Eventually it is taken over by mercenaries and adventurers, etc.

Something like that they even had in the expanded edition prologue of the Lynch movie where pre-Butlerian people are lazy and complacent and 'run by' machines rather than being the victims of some kind of silly Skynet-like evil computer.

On 4/21/2024 at 6:13 PM, Clueless Northman said:

IIRC indeed there were some variations of faceless dancers and other weird genetic furries coming from outer space, though it's never been made clear who they were - some offspring from mankind going to unknown space after Leto II's death, but other than that, nothing precise.

Yes, it is clear that the other enemy there would have been some other culture/group grown out of the Scattering, definitely not evil robots pulled out of the ass of the fan fiction gang. That said - in light of the fact that Herbert decided to reinvent the Tleiluxu as a deeply religious people combined with the fact that Scytale came back as a master and is carrying gene material stretching back to the era of Paul it strikes me as likely that the intention there was to go 'full circle' or 'back to the beginning' to a point in the final book.

Not to Butler stuff, but to the original Dune era, and, of course, to add a final twist to the Golden Path plan of Leto II. Some parts of him were still kind of alive in the new sandworms and that should have played a real role, too. And it seems clear that his breeding program - while also undercutting the foresight Kwisatz Haderach stuff for good - did more than just that. We see that in the descendants of Siona. They are a different breed of superhumans.

We also have that 'back to the beginning' and 'a final unification' thing in the final Duncan Idaho gaining the memories of all the Duncan Idahos. That would have been important, too.

On 4/23/2024 at 1:06 AM, Centrist Simon Steele said:

These two Dune movies have shown me that's not true. Dune is one of my most beloved book series of all time, and these movies were phenomenal. Even when it strays from the source material, I feel like it's doing it to preserve Herbert's vision. Sure, I really wanted to that dinner scene in Dune Part 1--I remember just loving that whole section in the book. Or Momoa being cast as Duncan Idaho--I like Momoa, but he strikes me more as a Gurney Halleck type than a Duncan Idaho. But something in the way Villeneuve captures him just works well.

Sad part is that they apparently shot that scene and many others ... and he decided to not include it and the others. The movies are stunning visually and greatly adapt the core story, but not much else. Yueh, for instance, lacks screentime in part 1, as does Thufir in part 2. And, of course, them not elaborating on Chani's connection to Liet-Kynes. Her wanting 'to save' Arrakis through secular science rather than religious nonsense because she was her mother's daughter could have greatly helped there. I imagine they had such scenes there but they were cut, too. It is clear in part 1 that Liet's role with the Fremen was supposed to elaborated later on.

On 4/23/2024 at 1:06 AM, Centrist Simon Steele said:

The ending of Dune Part 2 with Chani also worked for me. Her response to Paul was such a smart way to be faithful to Herbert's view of Paul: a hero that becomes a messiah is a bad thing. I was surprised to find myself siding with Chani at the end of the film. I've always loved Paul and believed he tried to do his best despite the horrendous consequences. I still believe that about him, but Chani's role in the story makes me think he is so short-sighted, which is obviously ironic given his foresight. 

While I agree that this is the first adaptation making it clear that Paul is going to be a monster - or a the figurehead of a monstrously fanatical movement - the movie undercuts that message by having the Great Houses opposing his rise to the throne in the end. That is then the explanation/justification for the Fremen crusade ... whereas in the book Paul has all the power he and the Fremen could want and the latter still want to butcher billions in their misguided zealotry.

There is no political justification nor even a pretext for the jihad in the book. And it is clear that all Paul can do is stand by and rubberstamp the wishes and deeds of the fanatics. If he were to try to stop them, he would be killed and the war be done in his name, anyway.

On 4/23/2024 at 1:06 AM, Centrist Simon Steele said:

I think removing the first Leto II from this part of the story helped with that. I just started rereading the book (it's been over a decade so the details are murky), but I believe the full-scale war already had started in the book when Leto II dies in the novel. But in the film, when Sietch Tabr is attacked, if Leto II had been born and died there, it gives the audience more reason to side with Paul. By removing that plot, Paul becomes a bit darker of a character we're not sure if we can trust.

Cutting the first Leto babe was okay, turning Alia into Jessicalia not so much.

My biggest gripe with part 2 is that the Fremen are portrayed as a colonized people whose technology/abilities are inferior to the technology/soldiers of the Harkonnens - which goes directly against the books as even Fremen women and children can hold their own to a point against the Sardaukar.

In a very real sense Paul is the victim of Fremen culture and ideology. Yes, the Bene Gesserit shaped their religion in the past, but as things take up steam he can only play the role of savior as they want it to be ... or he can die. He doesn't actually control things. He is little more than a catalyst. All he succeeds at is staying alive and getting his revenge, but nothing else.

The movie shows that part rather well at the gathering when he visibly plays a role for their benefit there ... and that is what he has to do the entire time.

That kind of stuff continues in Messiah and Children when we get to the trope of the blind seer and finally to Alia's 'possession'. Things are governed by religious rules and superstition. A living god/savior's power is, in the end, ruled by the rules and tenets of the religion he is a part of.

[Clueless Northman]

On 4/25/2024 at 1:00 AM, Lord Varys said:

There is no political justification nor even a pretext for the jihad in the book. And it is clear that all Paul can do is stand by and rubberstamp the wishes and deeds of the fanatics. If he were to try to stop them, he would be killed and the war be done in his name, anyway.

I actually just finished rereading the book (30 years after reading it a first time, my memory was becoming a bit fuzzy), and actually he "sees" since the beginning of the 3rd part ("2 years later"), because even though he's not yet the Kwizatch Haderach, even though he hasn't yet done his worm ride, he's already considered by many to be the Lisan al-Gaib and is already the figurehead for a lot of Fremen, including pretty much all the younger ones, and he's quite clear about the fact that even if he were to die right there, his impact on Fremen culture and society would be enough to launch the jihad, and a lot of his actions and thoughts during the last 150 pages of the book are "If I try this, can I avoid the bulk of deaths and destruction, can I actually avoid the jihad?".

By the time of Dune Messiah, so much bloody murder has been done in his name that he's quite jaded and cyncical about all this - though very self-deprecating about his role and his "holiness", as far as I can remember.

[Lord Varys]

3 minutes ago, Clueless Northman said:

I actually just finished rereading the book (30 years after reading it a first time, my memory was becoming a bit fuzzy), and actually he "sees" since the beginning of the 3rd part ("2 years later"), because even though he's not yet the Kwizatch Haderach, even though he hasn't yet done his worm ride, he's already considered by many to be the Lisan al-Gaib and is already the figurehead for a lot of Fremen, including pretty much all the younger ones, and he's quite clear about the fact that even if he were to die right there, his impact on Fremen culture and society would be enough to launch the jihad, and a lot of his actions and thoughts during the last 150 pages of the book are "If I try this, can I avoid the bulk of deaths and destruction, can I actually avoid the jihad?".

Yes, he realizes what's happening along the way, and realizes too late that he is trapped for good and (kind of) makes his peace with it.

Previous adaptations focused more on the payback aspect of the story which is there, too, but if you look at the larger picture it really doesn't matter if Shaddam and the Harkonnens are punished or not.

Of course, Paul the Martyr would launch another kind of holy war than the one they got, it would be more a war of revenge than what they did - which seems to have been a war to establish a proper theocracy according to Fremen beliefs. Because as I said and as the end of the book makes clear - Paul has all the military, political, and economic power at the end. The reason he marries Irulan is only to seize all the CHOAM shares of the Corrinos. There is no need for a continued war from an Atreides' point of view. That is the entire point of the control over the spice Paul acquires. The fact that there is a war shows that Paul has effectively no real control over his 'followers' nor do the Fremen wage their war to get their living god something he wants or needs. They just do it in his name and nothing he could do or say would stop them.

The new movie undermined the 'figurehead' part in the end by giving Paul and the Fremen an actual pretext/justification for the jihad - the continued resistance of the Great Houses - which isn't there in the book. The terrible part about the war in the book is that the only reason for it seems to have been Fremen fanaticism - the wish to make the entire universe worship their god the way they want to. All other beliefs, religions, ways of life would have been heresy and blasphemy. Not to mention that to most Fremen planets with as much water as Caladan would have been seen as obscene simply by existing...

3 minutes ago, Clueless Northman said:

By the time of Dune Messiah, so much bloody murder has been done in his name that he's quite jaded and cyncical about all this - though very self-deprecating about his role and his "holiness", as far as I can remember.

Has been a while for me, too, but the problem with that book is that the war is not really discussed or touched upon in detail. But we get enough to immediately see that the corrupt clergy the Fremen created and run as well as the religion built around Paul and Alia is nothing they actually designed or wanted. In a very real sense they both are figureheads and puppets who play a role in the Fremen religion (e.g. Saint Alia of the Knife). They are not really in charge. Or rather - they are only in charge as living gods wanting what living gods want - being worshipped, rule the entire universe with an iron fist, etc. If they were to decide to not want to be living gods wanting living gods stuff they would quickly become dead gods and the people ruling in their name would continue doing the same shit in their name. They can execute all the traitors, heretics, villains they want, can seize and take everything they want, etc. ... but they are not free to return 'power to the people' if they wanted that, nor retire or try to be secular dictators/absolute rulers.

And that even continues in book 3 when blind Paul sees no other choice but to undermine the monster he created than using religious language yet again, painting his own sister and her followers as heretics who betrayed 'Muad'dib's legacy'.

[karaddin]

Finally seen this myself and caught up on the thread. Someone asked in the previous thread why Paul was talking to Jamis before he decides to go south - it was Jamis' voice that the "desert spirit" (or was it demon?) used to speak to him earlier in the movie after Stilgar's warning not to listen to them. It was essentially the voice the planet/his vision was using prior to drinking the water of life. 

If the theory that the "hello grandfather" indicates the story diverging from the books down an alternate timeline is correct then it's giving me some serious Zero Requiem vibes from Code Geass. Spoilers for that below in case anyone at this point still has any interest in that but hasn't watched it

Spoiler

Lelouch deliberately goes full evil to focus all the hatred of the world on himself, even including the hatred of his sister that was his reason for everything he did in the first place, and sets someone up to be the hero that kills him and gives the world a chance at escaping the cycle of violence it was trapped in. 

Perhaps DV sees the things that Paul was unwilling to do in the books was drive Chani away from him, but the movie version is taking that path - sacrificing himself, his love and even his future children for the sake of avoiding the full blown jihad. In that case we would see Chani commit to opposing him within the Fremen and emerge as the leader of the Fremen at the end of the 3rd movie.