He seems so incredibly grounded with a wonderful perspective on not only film but life as well. He's a treasure and I hope he continues to grace us with more amazing works.
I watched it yesterday and even though I knew it was going to be good by all the comments I've heard it still blew me away. It really is a masterpiece in every sense of the word.
This film is UNBELIEVABLE. But it's no Empire Strikes Back. The Empire Strikes Back was a seismic earthquake that shattered more than the film industry, it was the witnessing of what a part 2 could be before sequels were a thing. You can't passover the fact that The Empire Strikes back was the first of its kind, with nothing before it. It became a WORLDWIDE cultural shock of a movie. However, that doesn't take away that Dune Part Two is jawdroppingly good.
Frank Herbert indeed wrote a cautionary tale about heroes, so he indeed wrote a hero, not a anti-hero... Frank Herbert's criticisms about heroes can also be said to Luke Skywalker or Captain America or any prophet of your faith, cause he didn't critic their personality and barely their action, but how they affect society and people's mind. The humanity savior the "true hero" of the Dune saga is probably the most tyrannic being ever portrayed, so it's not a story about a person could be deceiving, deceiving is not even a subject.
Semantics. An anti-hero, to us, is a villain or neutral character who becomes or acts heroic, which is an accurate description of Paul from the perspective of the reader, however he is initially framed. That Paul is heroic by comparison to others in his universe makes him legitimately heroic in neither his nor ours; the term 'heroism' is relative in both, but Paul is a glorified vengeance-seeker, which is an anti-hero in Western fiction. He's a 'true' in-universe hero, as you say, but an anti-hero to us, _because_ we have the perspective and space for idealism he doesn't. Herbert warns us of anti-individualism, dogma, and idolatry, and that anyone can appear heroic as long as they can convince enough people that a utopia is worth any price, not that heroes are inherently, and always, false.
@@DuBstep115Yes and he took the dune series with him because after messiah dune goes from a literature masterpiece to complete dogshit with whatever book 4-6 were. So glad Dennis is stopping with messiah.
@@DuBstep115 4th is the best book for midwits, who have never read actually philosophical literature, thinking GEoD is deep. Dune series is a straight decline in quality. Only the first one has any literary value.
Interestingly if Denis didn’t make changes to the ending in order to set up the third film the comparison would be harder to make. The ending of the book is neater but Denis obviously saw the opportunity to set up the third film more directly and thus create a neat cinematic trilogy.
That’s a bit of a backwards idea IMO. Dune was considered visually unadaptable for so many years and Lucas FLIPPED it so that it was a cinematically viable product. He understood the medium of movies. I feel like the current praise for this movie has to step back and understand we’re currently in a time where less purely cinematic products are being made and leaning heavily on dense literature for big blockbusters is not necessarily a ‘better’ thing. Dune is awesome but it’s somewhat of a cinematic regression in the grand scheme, it mostly just says a lot about how good of an “adapteur” Villenueve is.
@elstcman5 I can respect that, but Lucas, to my knowledge, has never come out and admitted he lifted the idea of Star Wars from Dune. From what I was told as a kid, Lucas claimed, "It came to him in a dream." And now that we have the fully realized world of Dune, Star Wars feels a bit like buying the off-brand cereal.
@@rileymcphee9429 I enjoy your perspective but I think my point is that many would argue the “fully realized world of Dune” always existed in the books. Attaching integrity to whether or not a filmmaker comes out and cites their sources is a bit counter intuitive because MOST of the films we adore as a society are exaggerated, pulpy versions of source material. I mean, even Jurassic Park is based on a less visually engaging book. Our idea of moviegoing is ENTIRELY based on “lifted ideas” and re-branded cereals that are “tastier”. Star Wars has always been the Fruit Loops to Dune’s (the book) cheerios. So praising Dune as a movie product in 2024, is in a lot of ways backwards praising George Lucas for being the first to fully realize how Dune could be made into a pure movie product nearly 50 years ago
I love that Villeneuve is extremely humble, not a spec of pretentiousness or ego. Lovely Denis.
Glad, he helps removing that hirachical authority from Hollywood/his set
it seems he wants everybody to feel welcome and have a good time.
français canadien ❤❤❤
He seems so incredibly grounded with a wonderful perspective on not only film but life as well. He's a treasure and I hope he continues to grace us with more amazing works.
He’s incredibly affable
You know you're doing something right when Christopher Nolan compares your movie to Empire Strikes Back
modern masterpiece for sure
And Nolan did the Empire Strikes Back of Batman in 2008.
I'm seeing Dune 2 tomorrow.
As the Star Wars rerelease advertising said, I wish I could “see it again for the first time”.
Well, don’t leave us in suspense. What did you think??
@@pat7917wandering around the car park in a daze still...😅
I watched it yesterday and even though I knew it was going to be good by all the comments I've heard it still blew me away. It really is a masterpiece in every sense of the word.
Amazing to see the quantity of interviews he is doing. He is on a short list of press savvy auteurs.
Denis feels like he is into Carl Jung.
He mentions psyche and persona in ways that make me think he's a fan.
Same. Would fit with why I keep getting the impression he's quite humble and observant/self-aware compared to pretentious directors.
I'M 8 HOURS AWAY GAAH
This film is UNBELIEVABLE. But it's no Empire Strikes Back. The Empire Strikes Back was a seismic earthquake that shattered more than the film industry, it was the witnessing of what a part 2 could be before sequels were a thing. You can't passover the fact that The Empire Strikes back was the first of its kind, with nothing before it. It became a WORLDWIDE cultural shock of a movie. However, that doesn't take away that Dune Part Two is jawdroppingly good.
Frank Herbert indeed wrote a cautionary tale about heroes, so he indeed wrote a hero, not a anti-hero... Frank Herbert's criticisms about heroes can also be said to Luke Skywalker or Captain America or any prophet of your faith, cause he didn't critic their personality and barely their action, but how they affect society and people's mind.
The humanity savior the "true hero" of the Dune saga is probably the most tyrannic being ever portrayed, so it's not a story about a person could be deceiving, deceiving is not even a subject.
Semantics. An anti-hero, to us, is a villain or neutral character who becomes or acts heroic, which is an accurate description of Paul from the perspective of the reader, however he is initially framed. That Paul is heroic by comparison to others in his universe makes him legitimately heroic in neither his nor ours; the term 'heroism' is relative in both, but Paul is a glorified vengeance-seeker, which is an anti-hero in Western fiction. He's a 'true' in-universe hero, as you say, but an anti-hero to us, _because_ we have the perspective and space for idealism he doesn't. Herbert warns us of anti-individualism, dogma, and idolatry, and that anyone can appear heroic as long as they can convince enough people that a utopia is worth any price, not that heroes are inherently, and always, false.
@@Hoganply Paul is a coward who didn't have it what it takes to walk the golden path. So he walks to desert and leaves that to Leto II
@@DuBstep115Yes and he took the dune series with him because after messiah dune goes from a literature masterpiece to complete dogshit with whatever book 4-6 were. So glad Dennis is stopping with messiah.
@@barkley8285 3 is the worst book and 4th is the best one.
@@DuBstep115 4th is the best book for midwits, who have never read actually philosophical literature, thinking GEoD is deep. Dune series is a straight decline in quality. Only the first one has any literary value.
I love this guy.
Interestingly if Denis didn’t make changes to the ending in order to set up the third film the comparison would be harder to make. The ending of the book is neater but Denis obviously saw the opportunity to set up the third film more directly and thus create a neat cinematic trilogy.
Watching Dune 2, all I could think was how cheap Star Wars feels to me now knowing how much Lucas lifted from the universe.
That’s a bit of a backwards idea IMO. Dune was considered visually unadaptable for so many years and Lucas FLIPPED it so that it was a cinematically viable product. He understood the medium of movies. I feel like the current praise for this movie has to step back and understand we’re currently in a time where less purely cinematic products are being made and leaning heavily on dense literature for big blockbusters is not necessarily a ‘better’ thing. Dune is awesome but it’s somewhat of a cinematic regression in the grand scheme, it mostly just says a lot about how good of an “adapteur” Villenueve is.
@elstcman5 I can respect that, but Lucas, to my knowledge, has never come out and admitted he lifted the idea of Star Wars from Dune. From what I was told as a kid, Lucas claimed, "It came to him in a dream." And now that we have the fully realized world of Dune, Star Wars feels a bit like buying the off-brand cereal.
Yeah its in space, there’s an empire, there’s a desert planet.. but apart from that I think they’re completely different experiences
@@rileymcphee9429 I enjoy your perspective but I think my point is that many would argue the “fully realized world of Dune” always existed in the books. Attaching integrity to whether or not a filmmaker comes out and cites their sources is a bit counter intuitive because MOST of the films we adore as a society are exaggerated, pulpy versions of source material. I mean, even Jurassic Park is based on a less visually engaging book. Our idea of moviegoing is ENTIRELY based on “lifted ideas” and re-branded cereals that are “tastier”. Star Wars has always been the Fruit Loops to Dune’s (the book) cheerios. So praising Dune as a movie product in 2024, is in a lot of ways backwards praising George Lucas for being the first to fully realize how Dune could be made into a pure movie product nearly 50 years ago
@@elstcman5 I would say Star Wars is the Tootie Fruities to Dune's Apple Jacks, but I love the metaphor nonetheless 😂
bring this man to star wars
This movie is head and shoulders above Empire Strikes Back. Not even a close comparison.
So Dune 3 will have Muppets?
I'm gonna see it for the first time in ten years from now
Tolkein was one of the people who misunderstood the 1st book.
Interesting, in what way do you think he misunderstood it?
There's no way to know that. He didn't explain why he didn't like Dune.
worm
she shiny
Your movie is crap. Try reading the book first.
It’s a passion project by him since he read all the books as a teenager you clown. The films are extraordinary
He has, so what's your point?
So edgy. The movie is so good that your amusing comment doesn't even phase me.
MORON
Get a life