This is a great analysis for the movies. Jessica’s motivations are more justified in the books, if you understand the Universe of Dune. Survival is to rule. The books show us this. The emperor is paranoid and powerful hungry and kills and destroys houses at will. Jessica knows the only way for her son to survive is to rule with the protection of the Bene Gesserit - being the Kwisazt Haderach. It’s much more complicated than the movies.
Its funny how you criticized how easy it was for Paul to fit in to Fremen society and culture. But in the books, it’s actually much easier for him than in the movies. In the book he effortlessly rides Shai Hulud. But they actually changed it in the movie for him to struggle and fail at first. Which is why the shot of him standing up is so important. It’s showing his triumphant rise as the prophet Mua’dib. I also didn’t hear you mention how Paul is a trained Mentant and Male Bene Gesserit. Which, basically makes him a super genius in sense. So of course someone who has multiple superhuman abilities it’s going to be easy for him to supplant himself in Fremen society. Combine that with the water of life and Paul becomes one of the most powerful people in the universe at the time. He is not the chosen one per say, his Son fits the role of the chosen one more than he does. I’d recommend you read the books, as it’ll give you a deeper understanding of the story at large and why things happen the way they do. A lot of the things you criticized are actually covered in the books with quite a lot of detail. In the movies they used it more as unwritten subtext, as a “If you know you know whats going on here.”. But if you haven’t read the book I completely understand your confusion.
First off, thank you for being thoughtful rather than abrasive even though it seems we might disagree in some ways. Second, I do plan to read the book at some point, I do need some time away from Dune though now that I've spent so much time with the films 😅. What I will say is that things that you've mentioned - e.g. Paul being a super genius - I think are super interesting to think about purely within a film context. Like how do you visually portray such inherently internal aspects of being? That being said, I do think Villeneuve tried to cover as much of the overall content within the book as possible even though I think that's an impossible goal; instead, I wish he had tried for a more specific through-line that had something more coherent to say beyond the act of recreation. I also wish I could relate things back to the book more, if only there was time! Being a RUclipsr is hard! Comments like yours are encouraging though. Cheers
@@ryanczhou Of course!!! Although you’re a new channel, I really liked this video essay and you had a lot of really good points! It’s very clear you studied the movies diligently. You’ve demonstrated a clear potential for content making, and I pray that the algorithm will favour your channel and give you the views / engagement you deserve!! But yes, you’re totally right. In the books Herbert wanted to flip the trope of the chosen one on it’s head. Dune is in essence a criticism of religiosity, and a warning of how following a charismatic leader blindly can be disastrous. In the book there’s a line that states, “The worst thing you can do is put your people’s fate in the hands of a hero.”. So he purposefully made Paul this absolute übermensch, and gave him literally every skill/power in the Dune verse. Paul is essence supposed to effortlessly succeed to prove to illustrate the point that even if a space messiah came along, no matter how superhuman he is, it’s absolutely disastrous to put your faith in one man. As at the end of the day, it’s just another flawed human being. As Dune was written post WW2 and Herbert was a vehement atheist. In the second book Paul is actually compared to Hitler in a conversation with Stilgar, but Stilgar says something along the lines of “60 million deaths for Hitler isn’t bad, but you have far more.”. But your critiques of the movie are completely justified. It’s almost impossible to demonstrate clearly what happens in the books on film, as so much of it happens in the characters mind and from their perspectives. Its stated that Paul can’t actually see the future, but through being a super genius, Bene Gesserit witchcraft, the water of life (which is just an extremely extremely potent psychedelic & poison that allows an individual to reconnect with their ancestors memories/ego/consciousness), Paul’s mind is like a super computer that can predict the future based on unimaginable calculations. Think of the oracle from the matrix, how she was just a prediction algorithm. Same thing with paul. But thats almost impossible to demonstrate on screen without a boring 10 minute explanation. Like the book literally has a dictionary in the back, that you need to continually reference in order to understand the book. And the switch up after Paul drinks the water of life is poorly done in the movie in my opinion. In the books, Paul kinda goes through a personal crisis as he realizes the only way for him to get revenge is wage an intergalactic jihad and kill hundreds of millions, but after some deliberation decides to follow through with it. And then it leads to the scene of him declaring himself as the Lisan Al Gaib. But I appreciate your thoughtful response to my comment! And I look forward to watching and supporting your content in the future. I wish you the best of luck brother!! (And in the books Paul eventually is blinded by a nuke and decides to walk into the desert to his presumed death. However he survives into old age and is referred to as the mad prophet from the taboo / banned religion of Mua’dib. So he is taken down a peg.)
@@ryanczhou If there's anything we should learn from adapting novels, I think it's that adaptations should *not* try and establish their own through line. Unless you're Kubrick who was notoriously great at changing material, simply understanding the source material and its main themes, what makes it timeless, etc is the main goal and produces much greater content. Trying to create your own through line, rather than being faithful, is basically telling the audience that you believe your storytelling is better than one of the great authors whose novel you're adapting. In reality, practically zero writers in visual media are as good as the original authors. I mean, besides Kubrick's films or the Shawshank redemption, I can't think of really any films that benefited more by deviating from source material than by faithfulness.
I think we should cut him some slack though. watching this breathtaking masterpiece, is a totally different experience for those of us who have read the books before hand compared to those who see it only through the director's perspective; we have read franks perspective unfiltered; and have already experienced the magic of dune through our own imagination; we felt how it is like a puzzle we can never fully solve or a maze we must just go through n come out the other end not seeking any absolution! Like jamis says in the first movie life is not a problem to be solved but a reality to experience! But the ones who dont know the whole bigger picture things like easyness to adapt with Fremen ways must be criticized and discussed at lenght! but no worries felow dune traveler, that's ok because either way one comes out of the whole experience with a totaly new and changed perspective on things! It's a huge story set in endless cosmos, constantly and relentlessly unfolding its complicated plots within plots, twists withing twists and its faints within faints! Even for those who are reading it for the 2nd time it is still hard to grasp! i think the film makers did an amazing job at capturing herbert's vibe, and obviously have a good handle of his vision and the book's core messages. Denis Vellenuve's interpretation of Dune and his vision is just as awesome and grand as herbert's was. Im kind of envious to be honest; I wish (like our critic here) i also hadn't read the books first and didn't know what is to come next whilst feasting my eyes on his deliouciously imagined dune buffet!
The Dune movies are an adaptation first and foremost. That is the impression Villeneuve gives from every interview he's given. Changing the second part's story fully to Chani's perspective would change the story far too much to remain a faithful adaptation of the source material. Simply because there's not a lot of Chani *in* the book. The changes to her and Paul's relationship in the movies are significant. Villenueve's decision to show Paul's change through having Chani as an anchor point for us to measure that change has made her character far more impactful than she was in the books (for good or ill I will reserve judgment if he decides to adapt Messiah as well). Dune is Paul's story in the end, and switching perspectives too much to the side characters would do the source material a disservice. I'd like to recommend that you read the books, not as a kind gotcha to finish off a "scathing" RUclips comment but as a way for you to see what a massive task Villeneuve had when tackling this adaptation. Fair warning though they're dense and nuanced. I have a feeling you'd like that.
That's totally fair. It was probably worth looking into Villeneuve's own process more on my end, but I also wanted to give a raw and honest opinion devoid of influence. I'm glad you took the time to comment, cheers
@willemtrialmont4241 in my opinion, as dune chronicals teach us message is what matters not trivia with which the message was translated! And he has got the main message of dune regardless of the differences in trivia! So i personaly think he is only calling his thirt installment "Messiah" for suprise effect! I think his third part will be the combination of dune messiah and children of dune with Alia’s regency being also a chunk of it!
You probably have already heard by now but as Villeneuve *is* planning on releasing Messiah, do we think there could be space for a side-movie about Chani?
Interesting;y, Villeneuve actually made Chani much more active and involved than she was in the book. Her having reservations at all is a film-invention. Also, I don’t see Jessica lying about Paul being ineffective at the voice early on nor the idea she’d want to punish him in Part One. She’s clearly upset that her son has to suffer this test and she’s powerless to refuse the Reverend Mother’s demands there. Before she takes the Water of Life, she fully views him as her son. It’s after that she treats him like a prop.
I know that Chani's reservations are film invention, but even so, if that's the case why not fully embrace that model and make it actually convincing? I think what you're arguing about Jessica is totally valid. For me, I don't think the switch in character was totally effective. Thanks for watching though and appreciate the comment!
Firstly, I think your video certainly deserves more attention; it is incredibly well done and put together. Your analysis is also thoughtful and refreshing, although I disagree with some points. Personally, I think Dune part one is a much weaker movie largely due to how it handled the plot involving Dr. Yueh. In the film, his motivations as a character are very unclear and seemingly illogical. Dr. Yueh’s betrayal is a pivotal part of the plot, which is explained much better in the novels. Additionally, Paul’s assimilation into Fremen culture was essential for many reasons important to the story: faithfulness to the source material (mostly), believability in gaining the Fremen’s trust, and world building. The original Dune movie from the 80s actually skipped this and is a major complaint by most people. Including this made Paul’s speech to the Fremen and fight with Feyd much more impactful from my perspective; I even found myself partially cheering for him despite knowing what he becomes later on. I think the fact those scenes are framed as triumphant adds to the tragedy of it. This is subtly underscored by a sense of malice in these scenes. That’s just my two cents as a Dune fan, overall I think you did an excellent job on the video! Definitely read the books, and keep it up!
I agree with your take about Dr. Yueh wholeheartedly. I also think Paul's assimilation is important but could have been handled better on screen, but like I said it's a pretty hard task to do. But thank you for your comment it's super sweet to get stuff like this
Great analysis, Ryan. I wonder if you could go further: is prophecy as a plot device even compatible with good story? Ever? Or does it destroy every franchise it touches? Does it reduce every attempt at a story to a mere prequel of itself, where the endpoint is already written and all that remains to be seen is how we get from here to there?
I would like you to make a book vs movie version of this video and then I’ll comment. Until then I won’t comment, although i definitely loved this movie. Might not agree with everything you said but it’s still an interesting video. Hopefully you make another video like this!
Like many others have already stated, I too disagree with the points you made that are not in line with the books, HOWEVER, I also liked part one better. I just usually like beginnings more, especially when they take their time and we get to "feel" the world. I was impressed by part 2 because of the way it handled the message, the rising of a terrifying profet, and thankfully it wasn't as action packed as the trailer made it out to be, though personally I would've wanted to see the beginning with the Fremen culture to be longer as it felt a bit rushed to me (probably am alone in this). Don't get me wrong, great action is nice to watch but it's just not the point of these films for me. The big battle at the end looked very nice to be sure, but it held no candle to the duel at the end. The Duel captured so much more subtext and themes, in a way mirroring Pauls first kill, as neither he did from bloodlust, but because it "had to be done". First killing "friend" now slaying a cousin. I'm torn on Chani, because I like that in the book first of all they've been together for years and have a son so in essence they have a solid marriage without it being official and Chani and Lady Jessica have a good relationship which is more refreshing to see than the basic "the bride hates the mother-in-law and vice versa" -trope, and when Paul needs to marry the Princess, it's Lady Jessica who comforts Chani pointing out that marriages are just political, but they as concubines to their lords are the actual partners. And Chani accepts this. Yeah, the problem with that is people can see Chani as not having enough agency, personally I always like it when women support each other and rationality trumps over needless kneejerk jealousy, but I also get it that current-day version of Chani needed a bit more "guts". Still I agree that I would've like to see the conflict a bit more nuanced, like you pointed out it's very much one note. So I also enjoyed this new version of Chani. Though I would've liked to see them in better terms with Lady Jessica, but as the film clearly doesn't have as long of a time period between part 1 and 2 as there is in the books at that point, it's more fitting for Chani to leave Paul as she isn't as attached. Don't know how they're gonna work that in later, if Chani will be given a new storyline and how they'll do that, but I'm glad we (hopefully) get to see that. This adaptation is faithful, but made some bold choises too, and all that's gonna do is enrich the world of Dune. Good luck with the channel! Glad the algorithm somehow brought me here now :)
Thank you! I am also glad the algorithm brought you here lol. I actually completely agree with you, I wish they had taken their time in the first part of Dune 2. That being said, it was already nearly 3 hours, but I did feel like Paul's integration into the Fremen was the weakest link of anything, Chani or not. Thanks for taking the time!
I also found the narative of part 2 a little flat. I think the shift was far too subtle. I did not enjoy the training montage. I feel it would have been better to frame this film ENTIRELY as if Paul was a Harkonen *not sure on spelling The first film was about Paul committing to his fathers legacy, second should have been entirely Harkonen style. Would have also liked to have seen the filn start on the Harkonen hineworkd to complete reframe the story rather than having it go there a way into the movie
Im going to make an educated guess: you sir have not read Dune or any of the other 5 subsequent books telling the aftermath of the central twist: humanity meddling in affairs best left to fate! Or chani (humanity) clashing with jessica (fate) as you rightly pointed out. Believe me when i say you sir have juged hastily (😅 ref. to Stilgar wordsin part 1). First of all the story isnt finished yet there is part 3 yet to come, oh and about your other hasy judgment on the ease with which Paul adapts fremen ways; take my word for it i know the original 6 frank herbert books by heart👇👇👇 In the book, it is even easier! In fact, it is mostly fremen trying desperately to adapt their ways to the sudden arrival of paul muadib Atreides on Dune!
I didn't read the books so I wasn't immediately aware of these problems with the second movie. I also felt that the second movie was very linear and the plot line felt simply inevitable but I wasn't able to formulate the reasons so well. Your insights and suggestions are great! 👍
Since when was it necessary to read a book to think critically about a film? Also yes, you're totally correct. Zendaya was in charge of the writing of her character....it definitely wasn't the producer, director, or I don't know, the writer
14:58 no it wasn't given a chance, and if you do get to the book series, you'll see how they adapted Chani to even get her that far I like the SciFi channel miniseries, but I also like this Chani
I was also disappointed when the credits rolled after part 2, but as my sister and I talked about everything that had happened, I realised something that, at least for me, rounds everything off perfectly (at least for now). This is mostly from my Letterboxd review (@who_lee if you wanna read the whole thing): This was a grievance at first, but it has become a point in the film's favour: I didn't know how to feel when it ended. Usually I would take that as a sign the director lost vision by the end and wrapped it up in a rush, but I know Denis Villeneuve is incapable of that. The conflicting emotions I feel are very purposeful and carefully constructed even from the very first line in Dune: "My planet, Arrakis, is so beautiful when the sun is low." A narrated line from part one that Chani repeats in part two, this time to Paul himself. It's a powerful choice to end on Chani's face, betrayed but resolute, after everything we've just seen. The attack on the Atreides in part one was probably the first time Paul had seen real war, and he lost his father, his friends, and his position, all at once. He's not his mother, driven by the need to fulfill a self-written prophecy, no matter the cost. Of course he's going to run from a future that leads to the realisation of his visions of death. But when he's left with no choice, he goes South and takes the venom (also wish this didn't feel so rushed), which opens his eyes to the future he can make a reality. The venom changes him. On the one hand, it frees him to fully embrace his role as messiah, because he's seen that what he's fighting for is possible, and it's beautiful. We, as the audience, root for him to succeed, because it's not just Paul Atreides's vision for Arrakis, it's also the Fremen's. Paul didn't force himself upon them, they welcomed him with open arms. He learned their ways and became, undisputably, one of them. (This is why I think the first 40mins of him assimilating cannot be removed.) On the other hand, it separated him from Chani. Chani, who can't even imagine swimming in a body of water. Chani, who, after months of getting to know him and being with him, came to love him. "I'm here, I'm here," when he's having nightmares. Touching his face, his hair... She's here and now, while his eyes are on what's to come. After taking the venom, Paul says he will love Chani until his last breath, but there's no love behind his eyes. Then we have Princess Irulan, who has doubt behind her eyes when the Reverend Mother asks her if she's ready to do what she has prepared her whole life to. Not doubt in herself, but doubt in the way she has always been told things should be. After Paul has his eyes opened by the venom, Chani and Irulan remain the two most human characters. Neither religious fanatics or under the influence of a sketchy substance that could kill you. The latter sympathetic to the former, attached to her father. The former consumed by the anger caused by the denial of everything she thought to be a lie coming true before her eyes and the betrayal of the one she loved. It's interesting that they're both the ones that begin the narration of each film, right? They're the connection to an audience left conflicted by a protagonist who is starting to feel like an antagonist. Oh, of course, after the opening line in what sounds like the Harkonnen tongue. Why? Well, it has been revealed that Jessica and Paul are directly descended from Baron Vladimir Harkonnen himself. And when the two most human characters feel alienated from the protagonist, so does the audience. I think the next installment is going to see Lady Jessica and Paul embracing their Harkonnen side (Vladimir, Rabban, and Feyd-Rautha all dead). So that's why I don't know how to feel after this film. Although we're told we should root for the protagonist, doing so feels wrong, and we're led to identify with the two characters who are opposed to him. It's very well done, and although I enjoyed part one more and like it better, part two is a perfect sequel and set-up to the next film. So yeah, those are my thoughts. It's hard to judge part 2 on its own, as it's a sequel and a set-up film at the same time, but I do agree that part 1 had impeccable storytelling in all its aspects.
This is a great analysis for the movies. Jessica’s motivations are more justified in the books, if you understand the Universe of Dune. Survival is to rule. The books show us this. The emperor is paranoid and powerful hungry and kills and destroys houses at will. Jessica knows the only way for her son to survive is to rule with the protection of the Bene Gesserit - being the Kwisazt Haderach.
It’s much more complicated than the movies.
Very high quality comments here. It shows you the level of the Dune community.
True!
Its funny how you criticized how easy it was for Paul to fit in to Fremen society and culture. But in the books, it’s actually much easier for him than in the movies. In the book he effortlessly rides Shai Hulud. But they actually changed it in the movie for him to struggle and fail at first. Which is why the shot of him standing up is so important. It’s showing his triumphant rise as the prophet Mua’dib. I also didn’t hear you mention how Paul is a trained Mentant and Male Bene Gesserit. Which, basically makes him a super genius in sense. So of course someone who has multiple superhuman abilities it’s going to be easy for him to supplant himself in Fremen society. Combine that with the water of life and Paul becomes one of the most powerful people in the universe at the time. He is not the chosen one per say, his Son fits the role of the chosen one more than he does. I’d recommend you read the books, as it’ll give you a deeper understanding of the story at large and why things happen the way they do. A lot of the things you criticized are actually covered in the books with quite a lot of detail. In the movies they used it more as unwritten subtext, as a “If you know you know whats going on here.”. But if you haven’t read the book I completely understand your confusion.
First off, thank you for being thoughtful rather than abrasive even though it seems we might disagree in some ways.
Second, I do plan to read the book at some point, I do need some time away from Dune though now that I've spent so much time with the films 😅.
What I will say is that things that you've mentioned - e.g. Paul being a super genius - I think are super interesting to think about purely within a film context. Like how do you visually portray such inherently internal aspects of being? That being said, I do think Villeneuve tried to cover as much of the overall content within the book as possible even though I think that's an impossible goal; instead, I wish he had tried for a more specific through-line that had something more coherent to say beyond the act of recreation.
I also wish I could relate things back to the book more, if only there was time! Being a RUclipsr is hard! Comments like yours are encouraging though. Cheers
@@ryanczhou Of course!!! Although you’re a new channel, I really liked this video essay and you had a lot of really good points! It’s very clear you studied the movies diligently. You’ve demonstrated a clear potential for content making, and I pray that the algorithm will favour your channel and give you the views / engagement you deserve!!
But yes, you’re totally right. In the books Herbert wanted to flip the trope of the chosen one on it’s head. Dune is in essence a criticism of religiosity, and a warning of how following a charismatic leader blindly can be disastrous.
In the book there’s a line that states, “The worst thing you can do is put your people’s fate in the hands of a hero.”. So he purposefully made Paul this absolute übermensch, and gave him literally every skill/power in the Dune verse. Paul is essence supposed to effortlessly succeed to prove to illustrate the point that even if a space messiah came along, no matter how superhuman he is, it’s absolutely disastrous to put your faith in one man. As at the end of the day, it’s just another flawed human being. As Dune was written post WW2 and Herbert was a vehement atheist. In the second book Paul is actually compared to Hitler in a conversation with Stilgar, but Stilgar says something along the lines of “60 million deaths for Hitler isn’t bad, but you have far more.”.
But your critiques of the movie are completely justified. It’s almost impossible to demonstrate clearly what happens in the books on film, as so much of it happens in the characters mind and from their perspectives. Its stated that Paul can’t actually see the future, but through being a super genius, Bene Gesserit witchcraft, the water of life (which is just an extremely extremely potent psychedelic & poison that allows an individual to reconnect with their ancestors memories/ego/consciousness), Paul’s mind is like a super computer that can predict the future based on unimaginable calculations. Think of the oracle from the matrix, how she was just a prediction algorithm. Same thing with paul. But thats almost impossible to demonstrate on screen without a boring 10 minute explanation. Like the book literally has a dictionary in the back, that you need to continually reference in order to understand the book. And the switch up after Paul drinks the water of life is poorly done in the movie in my opinion. In the books, Paul kinda goes through a personal crisis as he realizes the only way for him to get revenge is wage an intergalactic jihad and kill hundreds of millions, but after some deliberation decides to follow through with it. And then it leads to the scene of him declaring himself as the Lisan Al Gaib.
But I appreciate your thoughtful response to my comment! And I look forward to watching and supporting your content in the future. I wish you the best of luck brother!!
(And in the books Paul eventually is blinded by a nuke and decides to walk into the desert to his presumed death. However he survives into old age and is referred to as the mad prophet from the taboo / banned religion of Mua’dib. So he is taken down a peg.)
Thank you for all the love! You've definitely made me interested in checking out the books soon.
@@ryanczhou If there's anything we should learn from adapting novels, I think it's that adaptations should *not* try and establish their own through line. Unless you're Kubrick who was notoriously great at changing material, simply understanding the source material and its main themes, what makes it timeless, etc is the main goal and produces much greater content. Trying to create your own through line, rather than being faithful, is basically telling the audience that you believe your storytelling is better than one of the great authors whose novel you're adapting. In reality, practically zero writers in visual media are as good as the original authors.
I mean, besides Kubrick's films or the Shawshank redemption, I can't think of really any films that benefited more by deviating from source material than by faithfulness.
I think we should cut him some slack though. watching this breathtaking masterpiece, is a totally different experience for those of us who have read the books before hand compared to those who see it only through the director's perspective; we have read franks perspective unfiltered; and have already experienced the magic of dune through our own imagination; we felt how it is like a puzzle we can never fully solve or a maze we must just go through n come out the other end not seeking any absolution! Like jamis says in the first movie life is not a problem to be solved but a reality to experience! But the ones who dont know the whole bigger picture things like easyness to adapt with Fremen ways must be criticized and discussed at lenght! but no worries felow dune traveler, that's ok because either way one comes out of the whole experience with a totaly new and changed perspective on things! It's a huge story set in endless cosmos, constantly and relentlessly unfolding its complicated plots within plots, twists withing twists and its faints within faints! Even for those who are reading it for the 2nd time it is still hard to grasp! i think the film makers did an amazing job at capturing herbert's vibe, and obviously have a good handle of his vision and the book's core messages. Denis Vellenuve's interpretation of Dune and his vision is just as awesome and grand as herbert's was. Im kind of envious to be honest; I wish (like our critic here) i also hadn't read the books first and didn't know what is to come next whilst feasting my eyes on his deliouciously imagined dune buffet!
The Dune movies are an adaptation first and foremost. That is the impression Villeneuve gives from every interview he's given. Changing the second part's story fully to Chani's perspective would change the story far too much to remain a faithful adaptation of the source material. Simply because there's not a lot of Chani *in* the book. The changes to her and Paul's relationship in the movies are significant. Villenueve's decision to show Paul's change through having Chani as an anchor point for us to measure that change has made her character far more impactful than she was in the books (for good or ill I will reserve judgment if he decides to adapt Messiah as well).
Dune is Paul's story in the end, and switching perspectives too much to the side characters would do the source material a disservice.
I'd like to recommend that you read the books, not as a kind gotcha to finish off a "scathing" RUclips comment but as a way for you to see what a massive task Villeneuve had when tackling this adaptation. Fair warning though they're dense and nuanced. I have a feeling you'd like that.
That's totally fair. It was probably worth looking into Villeneuve's own process more on my end, but I also wanted to give a raw and honest opinion devoid of influence. I'm glad you took the time to comment, cheers
@willemtrialmont4241 in my opinion, as dune chronicals teach us message is what matters not trivia with which the message was translated! And he has got the main message of dune regardless of the differences in trivia! So i personaly think he is only calling his thirt installment "Messiah" for suprise effect! I think his third part will be the combination of dune messiah and children of dune with Alia’s regency being also a chunk of it!
You probably have already heard by now but as Villeneuve *is* planning on releasing Messiah, do we think there could be space for a side-movie about Chani?
I agree! Part One has so much that part Two doesn’t.
Everything in the life is like that, nothing is perfect.
Interesting;y, Villeneuve actually made Chani much more active and involved than she was in the book. Her having reservations at all is a film-invention.
Also, I don’t see Jessica lying about Paul being ineffective at the voice early on nor the idea she’d want to punish him in Part One. She’s clearly upset that her son has to suffer this test and she’s powerless to refuse the Reverend Mother’s demands there. Before she takes the Water of Life, she fully views him as her son. It’s after that she treats him like a prop.
I know that Chani's reservations are film invention, but even so, if that's the case why not fully embrace that model and make it actually convincing?
I think what you're arguing about Jessica is totally valid. For me, I don't think the switch in character was totally effective.
Thanks for watching though and appreciate the comment!
Really good, awesome video!
From Bring me the water to give him the water, do it. Chilling
Firstly, I think your video certainly deserves more attention; it is incredibly well done and put together. Your analysis is also thoughtful and refreshing, although I disagree with some points. Personally, I think Dune part one is a much weaker movie largely due to how it handled the plot involving Dr. Yueh. In the film, his motivations as a character are very unclear and seemingly illogical. Dr. Yueh’s betrayal is a pivotal part of the plot, which is explained much better in the novels.
Additionally, Paul’s assimilation into Fremen culture was essential for many reasons important to the story: faithfulness to the source material (mostly), believability in gaining the Fremen’s trust, and world building. The original Dune movie from the 80s actually skipped this and is a major complaint by most people. Including this made Paul’s speech to the Fremen and fight with Feyd much more impactful from my perspective; I even found myself partially cheering for him despite knowing what he becomes later on. I think the fact those scenes are framed as triumphant adds to the tragedy of it. This is subtly underscored by a sense of malice in these scenes.
That’s just my two cents as a Dune fan, overall I think you did an excellent job on the video! Definitely read the books, and keep it up!
I agree with your take about Dr. Yueh wholeheartedly. I also think Paul's assimilation is important but could have been handled better on screen, but like I said it's a pretty hard task to do. But thank you for your comment it's super sweet to get stuff like this
Great analysis, Ryan. I wonder if you could go further: is prophecy as a plot device even compatible with good story? Ever? Or does it destroy every franchise it touches? Does it reduce every attempt at a story to a mere prequel of itself, where the endpoint is already written and all that remains to be seen is how we get from here to there?
I would like you to make a book vs movie version of this video and then I’ll comment. Until then I won’t comment, although i definitely loved this movie. Might not agree with everything you said but it’s still an interesting video. Hopefully you make another video like this!
Thank you! Will try and read the books one day :3
Please read the books it will expand your understanding.
Will do my best sir
Like many others have already stated, I too disagree with the points you made that are not in line with the books, HOWEVER, I also liked part one better.
I just usually like beginnings more, especially when they take their time and we get to "feel" the world. I was impressed by part 2 because of the way it handled the message, the rising of a terrifying profet, and thankfully it wasn't as action packed as the trailer made it out to be, though personally I would've wanted to see the beginning with the Fremen culture to be longer as it felt a bit rushed to me (probably am alone in this). Don't get me wrong, great action is nice to watch but it's just not the point of these films for me. The big battle at the end looked very nice to be sure, but it held no candle to the duel at the end. The Duel captured so much more subtext and themes, in a way mirroring Pauls first kill, as neither he did from bloodlust, but because it "had to be done". First killing "friend" now slaying a cousin.
I'm torn on Chani, because I like that in the book first of all they've been together for years and have a son so in essence they have a solid marriage without it being official and Chani and Lady Jessica have a good relationship which is more refreshing to see than the basic "the bride hates the mother-in-law and vice versa" -trope, and when Paul needs to marry the Princess, it's Lady Jessica who comforts Chani pointing out that marriages are just political, but they as concubines to their lords are the actual partners. And Chani accepts this. Yeah, the problem with that is people can see Chani as not having enough agency, personally I always like it when women support each other and rationality trumps over needless kneejerk jealousy, but I also get it that current-day version of Chani needed a bit more "guts". Still I agree that I would've like to see the conflict a bit more nuanced, like you pointed out it's very much one note.
So I also enjoyed this new version of Chani. Though I would've liked to see them in better terms with Lady Jessica, but as the film clearly doesn't have as long of a time period between part 1 and 2 as there is in the books at that point, it's more fitting for Chani to leave Paul as she isn't as attached. Don't know how they're gonna work that in later, if Chani will be given a new storyline and how they'll do that, but I'm glad we (hopefully) get to see that. This adaptation is faithful, but made some bold choises too, and all that's gonna do is enrich the world of Dune.
Good luck with the channel! Glad the algorithm somehow brought me here now :)
Thank you! I am also glad the algorithm brought you here lol.
I actually completely agree with you, I wish they had taken their time in the first part of Dune 2. That being said, it was already nearly 3 hours, but I did feel like Paul's integration into the Fremen was the weakest link of anything, Chani or not.
Thanks for taking the time!
Opinion: I think the title of this video is a little misleading
I also found the narative of part 2 a little flat. I think the shift was far too subtle. I did not enjoy the training montage. I feel it would have been better to frame this film ENTIRELY as if Paul was a Harkonen *not sure on spelling
The first film was about Paul committing to his fathers legacy, second should have been entirely Harkonen style. Would have also liked to have seen the filn start on the Harkonen hineworkd to complete reframe the story rather than having it go there a way into the movie
Im going to make an educated guess: you sir have not read Dune or any of the other 5 subsequent books telling the aftermath of the central twist: humanity meddling in affairs best left to fate! Or chani (humanity) clashing with jessica (fate) as you rightly pointed out. Believe me when i say you sir have juged hastily (😅 ref. to Stilgar wordsin part 1). First of all the story isnt finished yet there is part 3 yet to come, oh and about your other hasy judgment on the ease with which Paul adapts fremen ways; take my word for it i know the original 6 frank herbert books by heart👇👇👇
In the book, it is even easier! In fact, it is mostly fremen trying desperately to adapt their ways to the sudden arrival of paul muadib Atreides on Dune!
I didn't read the books so I wasn't immediately aware of these problems with the second movie.
I also felt that the second movie was very linear and the plot line felt simply inevitable but I wasn't able to formulate the reasons so well.
Your insights and suggestions are great! 👍
Thank you!
Men, i hate that you have a point, still a great movie. But not the same as the first defenetly.
Poor analysis you never read the book lmao.
The actress didn’t read the book similar to yourself and wanted a bs twist on the character.
Since when was it necessary to read a book to think critically about a film?
Also yes, you're totally correct. Zendaya was in charge of the writing of her character....it definitely wasn't the producer, director, or I don't know, the writer
I think you're focusing too much on the characters.
14:58 no it wasn't given a chance, and if you do get to the book series, you'll see how they adapted Chani to even get her that far
I like the SciFi channel miniseries, but I also like this Chani
I was also disappointed when the credits rolled after part 2, but as my sister and I talked about everything that had happened, I realised something that, at least for me, rounds everything off perfectly (at least for now). This is mostly from my Letterboxd review (@who_lee if you wanna read the whole thing):
This was a grievance at first, but it has become a point in the film's favour: I didn't know how to feel when it ended.
Usually I would take that as a sign the director lost vision by the end and wrapped it up in a rush, but I know Denis Villeneuve is incapable of that. The conflicting emotions I feel are very purposeful and carefully constructed even from the very first line in Dune: "My planet, Arrakis, is so beautiful when the sun is low."
A narrated line from part one that Chani repeats in part two, this time to Paul himself.
It's a powerful choice to end on Chani's face, betrayed but resolute, after everything we've just seen.
The attack on the Atreides in part one was probably the first time Paul had seen real war, and he lost his father, his friends, and his position, all at once. He's not his mother, driven by the need to fulfill a self-written prophecy, no matter the cost. Of course he's going to run from a future that leads to the realisation of his visions of death. But when he's left with no choice, he goes South and takes the venom (also wish this didn't feel so rushed), which opens his eyes to the future he can make a reality.
The venom changes him. On the one hand, it frees him to fully embrace his role as messiah, because he's seen that what he's fighting for is possible, and it's beautiful. We, as the audience, root for him to succeed, because it's not just Paul Atreides's vision for Arrakis, it's also the Fremen's. Paul didn't force himself upon them, they welcomed him with open arms. He learned their ways and became, undisputably, one of them. (This is why I think the first 40mins of him assimilating cannot be removed.)
On the other hand, it separated him from Chani. Chani, who can't even imagine swimming in a body of water. Chani, who, after months of getting to know him and being with him, came to love him. "I'm here, I'm here," when he's having nightmares. Touching his face, his hair... She's here and now, while his eyes are on what's to come. After taking the venom, Paul says he will love Chani until his last breath, but there's no love behind his eyes.
Then we have Princess Irulan, who has doubt behind her eyes when the Reverend Mother asks her if she's ready to do what she has prepared her whole life to. Not doubt in herself, but doubt in the way she has always been told things should be.
After Paul has his eyes opened by the venom, Chani and Irulan remain the two most human characters. Neither religious fanatics or under the influence of a sketchy substance that could kill you. The latter sympathetic to the former, attached to her father. The former consumed by the anger caused by the denial of everything she thought to be a lie coming true before her eyes and the betrayal of the one she loved.
It's interesting that they're both the ones that begin the narration of each film, right? They're the connection to an audience left conflicted by a protagonist who is starting to feel like an antagonist.
Oh, of course, after the opening line in what sounds like the Harkonnen tongue. Why? Well, it has been revealed that Jessica and Paul are directly descended from Baron Vladimir Harkonnen himself. And when the two most human characters feel alienated from the protagonist, so does the audience. I think the next installment is going to see Lady Jessica and Paul embracing their Harkonnen side (Vladimir, Rabban, and Feyd-Rautha all dead).
So that's why I don't know how to feel after this film. Although we're told we should root for the protagonist, doing so feels wrong, and we're led to identify with the two characters who are opposed to him. It's very well done, and although I enjoyed part one more and like it better, part two is a perfect sequel and set-up to the next film.
So yeah, those are my thoughts. It's hard to judge part 2 on its own, as it's a sequel and a set-up film at the same time, but I do agree that part 1 had impeccable storytelling in all its aspects.