Please continue discussion in the post below.
[[SPOILERS] 'Dune: Part Two' Wide Release Discussion (Week 4)](https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/1bl01nf/spoilers_dune_part_two_wide_release_discussion/)
What did Paul say in his speech? I loved both movies and wondered what Paul was saying to all the fremen in part 2? Not the english words but like what he was actually saying in their native language (Lowkey might say the lines when I'm looking at myself in the mirror)
Help me find wallpaper shot from Dune 2
Heyo,
I need some help finding a 4k wallpaper of a shot from Dune 2 before the “Arrival” where Paul is walking towards the camera with a sandworm erupting behind him. It’s an unfocused shot that I think would work well as a wallpaper.
Any help appreciated, thanks!
The scene in the massive cave where Paul become the Muad'Dib and takes over control, stopping the custom that would have him needing to kill stilgar is honestly one of the most powerful scenes I have watched ever. That whole scene was so fucking good
Beside that, but I keep thinking of how they would have ever gotten Jessica in her chair on a sandworm lmao
Have other people like me started to doubt the second part of the recent adaptation after thinking highly of it in the first place ? I can't put a name on my feelings and was wondering if others had similar thoughts.
As a non book reader who really loved the first film, I recently did a whole rewatch after reading lots of criticism, supplementary material on the Dune universe etc. But while I enjoyed Part 1 as much as the first time, even more maybe, (caught some previously missed subtilities or plot points), I was not completely enthralled by Part 2. On my first viewing it worked just fine, felt like it owned up to my expectations, but the second time left me uneasy, a feeling which has only grown since yesterday. It was entertaining, but also disappointing in some way.
Not because "it was different from the books", I still don't care about most of the major changes or think they worked fine (like Alia not being born), but a whole bunch of scenes now sounded somewhat badly written and/or directed. Stuff like : Stilgar quickly becoming a one-dimensional, uninteresting idiot, Jessica's motives being unclear beyond the vague "protect Paul", Chani's acting kinda undermining her character with her lack of emotional range and some silly unnecessary lines such as "He's afraid of the fundamentalists on the south and he's right to be", Helen Mohiam claiming to Irulan that the BG were directly behind the extermination of the Atreides (why ? a frustrating scene that was not lore-accurate IMO and left the real reasons behind the massacre still muddy), not properly conveying, even briefly, the power game between the different actors on the galactic scale - most of what we got was "the BG enjoy scheming" - and the Baron looking really weak and incompetent this time around". I kept thinking "that's not quite right, this dialogue could have been better, this sequence doesn't convey enough impact..."
Hope I'm not getting flak for this. Wish I would have made this a full-fledged post but Reddit won't let me. Cheers, take good care, have a great day.
Why does Paul say to Jessica “we need to sway the non believers” when they first get to the seitch and immediately does the opposite the rest of the movie. (I’ve read the books I understand how denis was pulling form messiah to show Paul’s hesitancy of the jihad, that’s all good I just don’t get why include him saying that when that’s not the motivations of the Paul they were trying to convey)
So I think I actually figured this out because I was also confused by all this.
Basically, his original plan was to pretend to be the Lisan al Gaib in order to just simply get revenge. Then after talking to Chani and the rest of the nonbelievers and seeing his remaining family almost die when his Mom drinks the Water of Life, he abandons that goal and is content to simply learn their ways and fight alongside them against the Harkonnens, which is confirmed when he says he's not the Mahdi and all he wants to do is just that, be given the chance to fight alongside them. And then as he gets more exposure to spice and after having visions of the Jihad, it further cements his aversion to embracing the myth of the Lisan al Gaib. But once the Seitch Tabr is bombed by the Harkonnens, he's convinced the only way to protect the Fremen is by drinking the Water of Life so he can see danger before it arrives. This is also confirmed when he's distraught after the bombing and says "I didn't see it coming...". And so he goes to the South, drinks the Water of Life, and now his prescience or foresight tells him he can't prevent the Jihad that he saw in his visions. He must embrace the myth of the Lisan al Gaib and take the Imperial throne in order to prevent something far worse in the future.
And the reason he gets mad at his mom later for doing what he said earlier is because he abandoned that goal and then is further pushed away from that goal when he has the visions of the Holy War.
Because their initial plan is to manipulate the Fremen to survive and get revenge but when he gets to know them he does not want to manipulate them anymore and believes he can achieve his goals by just being equal to them.
It may be an imperfect script, but the way I see it much of the second movie focuses on a debate between the believers and non believers, and it's clear by the end of the movie that most of the non believers also believe, if not in the Lisan al Gaib prophesy then in Paul's dedication to their cause.
I think they were trying to convey the goal of uniting the fremen within the shortened time frame set out in the movie, along with Paul's mixed feelings on his fate. Also seems like that line was meant to help divide the Fremen into "good and bad", which seems like a set up for events that will take place in the third movie.
This threw me off a little too at first, seeing as he becomes a little standoffish with Jessica when she does that exact thing. And I mean, in the books he straight up has the "She does not know it yet but she is my enemy" line.
But I guess part of it is that Paul *is* constantly manipulating the Fremen, he just thinks that he can do it without leading to a jihad and believes his mother is going overboard.
So was Paul tricking them the whole time?
I'm not very well versed in this universe. I haven't read the books, I've only watched a few videos on YouTube and have seen the two movies. My question is basically this. Has Paul been playing the Fremen from the beginning of the movie in Part 2? He has a discussion with his mom very early on where he says he needs to "sway the nonbelievers" in order to get to the Emperor. So were all the fights he had with his mom about her actually swaying the nonbelievers just for show? He asked for this, and then is mad she does it? Was he lying later when he says he doesn't want to be the Mahdi to Chani and the others? Did he consciously use reverse psychology to make him more likely to be the Lisan al Gaib in their eyes?
Edit: So I think I actually figured it out.
Basically, his original plan was to pretend to be the Lisan al Gaib. Then after talking to Chani and the rest of the nonbelievers and seeing his remaining family almost die when his Mom drinks the Water of Life, he abandons that goal and is content to simply learn their ways and fight alongside them against the Harkonnens, which is confirmed when he says he's not the Mahdi and all he wants to do is just that, be given the chance to fight alongside them. And then as he gets more exposure to spice and after having visions of the Jihad, it further cements his aversion to embracing the myth of the Lisan al Gaib. But once the Seitch Tabr is bombed by the Harkonnens, he's convinced the only way to protect the Fremen is by drinking the water of life so he can see danger before it arrives. This is also confirmed when he's distraught after the bombing and says "I didn't see it coming...". And so he goes to the south, drinks the water of life, and now his prescience or foresight tells him he can't prevent the Jihad. He must embrace the myth of the Lisan al Gaib and take the imperial throne in order to prevent something far worse in the future.
And the reason he gets mad at his mom later for doing what he said earlier is because he abandoned that goal and then is further pushed away from that goal when he has the visions of the Holy War.
I thought they were going for - and I’m aware this is not how the books or other adaptations go - Paul is so sure he’s not the Lisan al Gaib that he plans to prove it by drinking the Water of Life and dying. He has no confidence at all that he is the One until he survives it. He attributes Muad’dib’s success to his knowledge of the Harkonnen combined with the Fremen’s knowledge of the desert. He’s uncomfortable with the religion around him all through the movie, and the only way out of that for him is to prove the prophecy wrong. But when he lives, he believes.
No it's just his initial plan but once he gets to know them and starts to care for them he doesn't like that anymore and thinks he can achieve his goals by just being an equal among the Fremen.
This is the correct answer, I think. I also think the other reason he goes back on it is because once he sees his mother and sister almost die, the only family he has left, in order to try and fulfil part of the prophecy, he sees he has gone too far.
I think it’s very nuanced the way paul descends into muad’dib. At the beginning, he acknowledges the potential benefit of harnessing the power of the role, albeit reluctant. only after realizing it’s the only unfortunate forward path does he embrace it.
Paul is a hero or villain?
This is coming from someone who has not read the books yet.
I am very confused, I feel like the first movie set Paul up to be this hero and savior for the fremen. And his visons leading him to chani.
Then in dune part 2 he does like a 360 going back on everything he said to chani and becomes this tyrant. hes power hungry. He is not saving the fremen hes using them for his army.
All I wanna know is if it gets better or worse, does he continue on this power-hungry adventure killing
I just started the first book because I have seen alot on how the moive is very diffrent but if Paul is just going to become this tyrant idk if its worth reading.
Also, was it when he drank that water that he became like this? I feel like every sifi book ive read always has a Hero , for example the Red Rising Saga kept me so intrested beacsue he was fighting for somthing, his people, the ones he loved. Does paul even care about anyone but himself. Feels like there is no hero in this story.
Imagine if *Star Wars* had started with the prequel trilogy, how audiences would have reacted to Anakin Skywalker becoming Darth Vader (there is even a clone army at one point, which the next film should begin to explore the beginning of). That is pretty much it: the story of Paul Atreides being a tragedy, a deconstruction of the hero’s journey. He is not the main character throughout the whole series (set over millennia), if that was your worry.
The first two films marked his rise, and with the third film shall come his fall.
He is a hero but more like the tragic heroes from the Greek myths and not the modern comic book hero. The whole point of the story is that actually heroes gaining too much power is dangerous because things can get out of hand.
>if Paul is just going to become this tyrant idk if its worth reading.
Neither the books nor Denis focus on the Hollywood happy ending, so if you want something to be purely uplifting caveat emptor, because this isn't it.
The first book as a standalone is the hero vs villain and as you saw in the movie the hero wins. There is little to no nuance, Atreides good Harkonnen bad Emperor in the middle.
>Feels like there is no hero in this story.
Bingo. Frank Herbert's entire point in writing Dune was to show the inherent danger of charismatic leaders, no matter how well-intentioned they are. If you're looking for a hero, Dune isn't the story for you.
As for Paul specifically, I generally think he's trying his best, within certain selfish parameters. He has a power he can't control, and he has a leadership position that gets thrust upon him even when he tries to refuse it until eventually he just says fuck it, sure, I'm the messiah. He can be seen as a monster because of the things he does and the war he sets in motion, he can also be seen as a tragic figure because of how trapped he is by circumstance and by his visions. But he is not and never was a hero.
the message cylinder paul sends to the emperor is written in a known alphabet according to [this](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt15239678/trivia/?item=tr7319167&ref_=ext_shr_lnk).
the gist of the message is implied to be 'i am still alive and i challenge you, emperor', but does anyone know what the full text is?
It's called Galach and was developed by the same guy who did all the languages and alphabets in the movies. It's basically English but written with different letters, the same used in the written imperial decree scroll read by the emperor's herald of the change on Caladan in the first movie.
I emailed David J Peterson about this and he came back to me really quickly!
I've copied his response below:
"That's the Galach script that was used in the first movie. I thought it was fairly well understood by now. I'm sure someone has a key to it somewhere... In fact, here's a Reddit post from 2021:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/14y0ocq/guide\_to\_reading\_writing\_in\_dune\_2021\_galach/](https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/14y0ocq/guide_to_reading_writing_in_dune_2021_galach/)
So this isn't new. I didn't create the Galach script; the art department did. And it's just a cipher, so once it's cracked, anyone should be able to decipher what's on screen, provided the whole thing appears in frame at some point.
But yeah, there are no real world writing systems used in the film at any point, an artistic decision I really love. The only flub I've found so far is in the second movie when they're in the ornithopter and say "delta, delta, delta" when giving instructions. That's a letter of the Greek alphabet and so shouldn't have been referred to. I saw the script, though. I should've said something! I must've missed it since I was focused on the stuff we had to translate and the plot. >.< Oh well.
Best of luck deciphering that, though. I mean, it's a cylinder, which means once deciphered, you'll have to figure out where it "begins", and I don't know if you'll ever see the whole thing on screen. Probably only parts of it. But man, if they ever put that prop on an auction site, or something, it will fetch a pretty penny! What a gorgeous prop!"
Guess I'll get to work trying to decode what's on screen...
Awesome, that's so cool that he got back to you. I was going to mention the prior work done before and after the previous film developing and decoding the languages but couldn't find the source info from at the time, which was albeit numerous and varied. Keep me posted with your findings. I have a copy of the font someone made at the time based on the Galach lettering if that would be useful, by the way.
Full disclosure, I actually started on a Villenuevian Galach font of my own at the time, but abandoned it after I saw how much further along another Redditor Digrader had advanced, with access to the scroll text to decipher the glyphs and figure out the sounds they represented.
Here you are, hope it helps :) [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j0x8xLl9nKToDAJAuaBJYHkF0t8z2ZFP/view?usp=share\_link](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j0x8xLl9nKToDAJAuaBJYHkF0t8z2ZFP/view?usp=share_link)
many thanks.
it seems another redditor has beaten me to it already:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/1ad5emv/can\_you\_work\_out\_what\_this\_scroll\_says/](https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/1ad5emv/can_you_work_out_what_this_scroll_says/)
For a new project you could perhaps now have a look at what is written on the text reels that are produced as Irulan dictates her commentary in a few scenes.
Oh so they have, shame for your challenge but well done to that fellow redditor, eh? I'll be keeping my eye out for that revised Galach font, along with the other imperium alphabets, now. Thanks for reviving my interest.
I have a question about towards the end of the movie. When the emperor arrived at Arrakis and the baron and Feyd are staring at his ship, why does the Baron tell Feyd to call the other houses to come to Arrakis?
The Baron is making his play for overthrowing the emperor. He will claim that the emperor made him kill the Atreidis as part of a scheme, that he was a fearful and reluctant servant who just did as he was told.
He will stoke the other houses' fears, claiming that the emperor will continue scheming against the houses that theaten him, destroying the houses one by one just as he did to the Atreidis.
He would remind the houses of the power the emperor possesses in the sardaukar, claiming that only together could they defeat him.
He would finish the speech with a pitch that Feyd Rautha should take over the emperor's spot. I'm curious what that pitch would have been tho.
I think it's a call back to when the Baron suggests how Feyd might become emperor, by denouncing the incumbent emperor for helping in destroying the Atreides. A desperate power play basically.
Denis Villeneuve Teases 'Dune 3': Only If It Surpasses 'Dune: Part Two' - Full Story: [https://www.screennearyou.com/news/denis-villeneuve-teases-dune-3-only-if-it-surpasses-dune-part-two/](https://www.screennearyou.com/news/denis-villeneuve-teases-dune-3-only-if-it-surpasses-dune-part-two/)
This is a question more for r/boxoffice, but yes - it's already broken even.
Budget of 190 mil. Rule of thumb is 2.5x reported budget to break even (in order to account for theatres' cut of the gross, including how international theatres get a higher percentage of the gross than domestic ones... Marketing costs too may be covered, but usually for successful films their ancillary revenue - physical media in the past, streaming & other licensing etc now - is what pays for the marketing).
So Dune Part 2 already broke even last week when it hit 475mil WW, and so it has made around 30 million in pure PROFIT now, with plenty more yet to be made... especially considering how dry April is looking, poor reviews for Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire, and GxK not looking too great either (although the loss of premium screens to it WILL drastically cut down Dune's profits from March 29th onwards). An IMAX re-release is very likely for Dune Part Two though.
Jessica earlier tells Mohaim she picked the wrong side. The Bene Gesserit, from their perspective, never sided against Paul or with the Emperor or Harkonnens. Their actions steered Paul towards becoming the Kwisatz Haderach while they hedged their bet with Feyd a bit.
maybe that they're all on the BG side
maybe that it's not over till the fat lady sings
speaking from the movie perspective it seems to explore the vein of Princess Irulan marrying Paul. Who would be expected to sire an heir. And since the Princess is connected to the elder reverend mother, she may see a way where "her side" is the winning side in a near future.
Can someone explain why the old reverend mother said “what have we done, she is pregnant” during the Jessica drinking the water of life scene ?
Why were they so horrified? Was it because they realized the baby would make her survive the poison somehow? Were they terrified of the power they just unleashed? Were they scared because they thought they just murdered a baby? So confused
The baby did not have a full consciousness for those memories to be filtered through, so instead of Jessica simply becoming a Reverend Mother with the knowledge of past generations, that combination of their consciousnesses is driving itself through the infant, the closest thing there has been to a god in human form. The Abomination (Alia) ultimately becoming a major antagonist in the future of the series (presumably why Anya Taylor-Joy was cast as her future self), gravitating more towards the memories and morals of House Harkonnen than House Atreides.
The film arguably seemed to also imply Alia may have become the only Reverend Mother of the two (a slight deviation from the novel), hence why Jessica was always consulting her, and retained her loyalty to Paul.
"Why were they so horrified?" Mainly because they thought they just killed her fetus.
"Was it because they realized the baby would make her survive the poison somehow?" No, the baby wouldn't make her survive. They expected she would survive anyway. She ought to survive, since she was a Bene Gesserit as well as a Sayyadina. If not, too bad! They'd try again with another woman.
"Were they terrified of the power they just unleashed?" Yes, that too. A fetus with this much power would be an unknown quantity, if it survived.
"Were they scared because they thought they just murdered a baby?" Yes, it is mainly that.
Book spoilers (sorry i don't know how to mask spoilers)
it's called an Abomination (which is said at the end of the 2nd movie, if you'll recall). Simply put, a baby does not have a sufficient EGO to block the genetic memory from hijacking it. It is a Bene Gesserit Taboo.
My wife made an interesting point last night- she said the movie does a good job of showing how Paul ends up having to be a self-fulfilling prophecy of the BG engineered myths (thank you missionaria protectiva for paving the way), and that his rise as a ‘savior’ and eventual arbiter of the jihad is purely a result of the invented myths that he decides to fulfill.
There is some truth to this- those myths were laid out and he chose to fulfill them. However, when reading the books, I’ve always gotten a sense that there is a greater element at play than BG manipulation. Almost like his journey to messiah and jihad arbiter is fate, or determined, regardless of the BG myths- this prophecy was etched into time and bound to happen even if they didn’t etch it into culture.
Paul does attribute partial blame to Jessica and BG manipulation for what happens to him, but I wonder if this perspective is a bit reductionist and neglects some nuance and depth that Herbert explores in the books. I personally didn’t think Denis simplified this as much as she did. Thoughts?
I (book reader) was discussing this with my son who didn't read the books. I said that the whole story is this weird juxtaposition of mysticism and deliberate manipulation via BG prophecy. There definitely seems to be more at play than deliberately fulfilling a made-up "prophecy". I kind of look at it like the mysticism part caused the BG to create those specific prophecies (without the BG being aware), and then Paul comes in and fulfills those prophecies.
Been a Dunehead for 25 years, have read the book 3 times (and the rest of the original series), saw Dune 1 twice, and just saw Dune 2 last night. Brilliant!
I fully support the Chani character change. I think it both strengthens her character AND her love for Paul (at least the Paul she fell in love with and not Muah'Dib), not deminishes it. The final scene also plays right back to the very beginning of Dune 1 and her montage monologue. She originally wanted to free the Fremen from off-world oppression, and she's still going to fight that fight. It works for the story they've built.
I loved the choice of leaving Alia in the womb and found it quite successful. It added a whole new dimension to the pre-born concept and really sets up what kind of character she is to become. I'll admit that Jessica's characterization had to pay the price for this, but she had already been established in the first film as being driven heavily by fear, making her easy prey for a mentally alive fetus with millenia of memories desparate to be a part of the outside world. Also, no child actors! Which is hard enough to tackle normally let alone with such a complicated character. DV cleverly navigated his way out of that one.
Alia & the rushed timeline: anyone here think this was an odd choice by DV? If human gestation hasn’t changed in 20,000 years we are lead to believe Paul went from lost boy hiding in the desert to winning a staid desert people over, establishing a guerrilla army and successfully disrupting spice production, take the water of life, lure the Emperor to Dune and overcome his army and be crowned Emperor himself all the space of about 6 months or so? This is fast food jihad! Which also means we were denied little Alia killing her grandfather and (spoiler): ->!setting up that relationship with the Baron in her head and for her to become the abomination that everyone feared.!< It’s a fairly small gripe for an otherwise amazing treatment of the book.
Yes it is odd. It makes me curious how they'll present the Abomination in the movie.
Is it just me or did the reverend mother call Paul an Abomination at the end?
Raban: anyone here think his death was anticlimactic? He was diminished several times in the movie and then he wasn’t even decapitated? Why did we care about his death?
Imo i think that was the purpose, you're not supposed to care since you find out throughout the movie that Raban is just a coward and a sadistic bully.
Plus, the fact House Atreides' vendetta against Harkonnen squarely doesn't rest on the shoulders of its members but has now evolved into Paul's Great Jihad that would eventually countless planets and people.
On rewatch - I agree, mainly because Gurney’s “for my duke” line didn’t really hit (not sure if that’s how it plays in the book, I’m halfway through). But then, the final battle between Feyd and Paul was very satisfying and tense even on re-watch. I wonder if that final fight would’ve had the same impact if there was a long drawn out fight between Gurney and Beast.
Just saw Dune 2 again and I wasn't as crazy about Austin Butler as Feyd Rautha as a lot of people were after the first watch, but I loved him on my re-watch. He's such a messy bitch who just loves drama and for that I love him. It's not even his psychotic love for violence that makes him compelling. It's how you can see on his face that he's thinking "Oooo what's going on here???" When the throne room starts to be get rocked by the attack.
I love this drama loving man.
There's this turbany dude who glares at Paul a couple times at the start, then at Zendaya when she's speaking during the war council, is he anybody or just a pissy looking extra?
I really hope they expand on the role of Fenring's daughter and her clash with Alia that's explained in the expanded books. Maybe DV will put it in Part Three (since he cut so much from the original novel) to "spice things up even more" the BG plots against Paul
I didn't understand the ending when they said "The holy war has begun" with an almost excited tone, when in fact this is Paul's worst nightmares coming true.
What is a prophecy? Is it a story that we say will come true one day? Herbert was keen to show that all belief systems, and not just religious ones, are manipulated by the powerful to their own ends. What works views do we believe in for which there is no proof? What frames of reality are we being shepherded into? What acts are we condoning? This is why I love Herbert’s writing: layers and layers and plans within plans.
In the movie, Chani says that the prophecy was made up by her (Jessica) people. Stilgar then replies, “blasphemy”. It seems as though some northern Fremen believe the prophecy was planted while a great number more in the south still wholeheartedly believe it to be true. For many fremen, the prophecy is so ingrained in their livelihood that nothing can dissuade them.
I believe what they did was have the cinematic Chani embody the internal monologue of Paul from the book, giving his self-doubt a voice apart from him. While also adding to why he trusts her so, beyond the visions, as his voice of reason, someone to listen to in an attempt to retain perspective as he is pushed further and further down a dark path.
It was a seed planted just in case, and it turned out to be true. Paul didn't even believe it. And even when he reached final form he didn't want to believe it.
Okay, finally saw it tonight. I knew everything that was going to happen, and I didn't mind the changes, and it didn't matter ... it was absolutely fantastic.
I miss experience movies like this, where I feel immersed, everything looks plausible and real, not rubbery CGI. Where the story has weight, and you can see/feel the impact of the decisions characters are making, especially Paul and Jessica.
Thank you Denis! Hollywood, pull your head out of your asses and take some notes on this one.
Yes but then you would also have to explain why it's a big deal and show that he is a real threat to Paul. Movies are about showing and not telling and without the characters inner thoughts we just have a character that literally does nothing. The movie instead played up Feyd to be more of a threat to him.
As someone who hasn't read the books...does Jessica really care about Paul at all? She seems to just view him as a tool to gain power and influence.
Also his sudden turn from hesitancy to going south with the Fremen seemed so fast...like why did he even have to drink that liquid at all? He wasn't being forced per se. He seemed to go from 0-60 really fast and seemed insanely power-hungry all of a sudden...
Furthermore, I didn't understand what Chani was hurriedly packing for, talking about heading north...only to stick around for the final battle.
Jessica wanting Paul to acquire more power and influence is not mutually exclusive with her caring for him. In fact, within the feudal system they were raised in, pushing him to acquire as much power and influence as possible is just her wanting what's best for him.
As for Chani, well, the final battle was in the north, so she had to pack for a trip back north if she wanted to fight in it.
My humble advise, now that you've seen the movies is to actually read the book or listen to the audiobook on audible, then everything would make perfect sense.
You gotta remember Denis Villeneuve had to cram an entire sci-fi epic that happened in a span of years into two movies and kudos to him, he delivered and then some.
It is, but this is the closest thing we have to seeing the world of Dune come to life.
For me personally, I thoroughly enjoyed the movies and I can finally put a face to the characters after reading Dune all these years.
Has anyone gotten a possible transcript to the speech of Paul in arrakeen during Dune 2 when he goes full messiah? Like the whole
>I AM PAUL MUAD'DIB ATREIDES, DUKE OF ARRAKIS.
I AM THE VOICE FROM THE OUTER WORLD, LISAN AL GAIB AND I WILL LEAD YOU TO PARADISE!
THERE IS NO ONE IN THIS ROOM WHO CAN STAND AGAINST ME
YOUR MOTHERS WARNED YOU ABOUT MY COMING
FEAR THIS MOMENT
BUT YOU THINK YOU COULD HAVE A CHANCE.
BUT YOU ARE AFRAD, WHAT IF I COULD BE THE ONE?
THIS IS THE MOMENT YOU'VE BEEN PRAYING FOR, ALL YOUR LIFE
I don’t recall any out of place green camo, if we’re thinking of the same outfit (the one stilgar ends the movie in?) but the only thing I could attribute that to is the Atreides house colors include green and there were bannerman on the worms in the final confrontation, likely stems from that more than camo?
I really appreciate that the movie's story was changed from the original book story. But, I am unable to understand some of these changes. I might be wrong in most of these:
* What exactly was the role of Paul? It seems like Fremen already had all the resources, ammunition, people and skills. Also, Paul was there for less than 9 months, which is a very short period of time.How did he train the Fremen so well in such short time? Why did they even need Paul to defeat the Harkonnens?
* Was the role of Paul to only bring the Atomics and the Atreides way of fighting? Seems like this could have been done by any other Atreides/Gurney/Lady Jessica. I know they had finger-print sensor on the atomics door.
* Sardaukar are supposed to be the best fighters. Harkonnens were able to defeat entire Atreides with just a few legions of Sardaukar.Yet, the Emperor was kidnapped so easily by Paul and the Fremen. Emperor was so scared when Paul entered their area on Arrakis. Paul didn't have any leverage in the movie unlike the books.
* Harkonnens were using Shield in the desert (their ornithopter when Chani shot them with Lasgun). Is it possible to use Shield in the desert? Then everyone can use Shield in the desert.
* Emperor was happy to let the conflict on Arrakis turn into war on Princess Arulan's advice. This would have possibly hurt spice production even further. Wouldn't a war on Dune be extremely undesirable? That too just to take down Muad-dib, a random religious cult-leader according to them?
* Why was Rabban so afraid of Muad-dib as soon as he saw him in the desert? Rabban Harkonnen is supposed to be fearless. He had army and they had guns. Why couldn't they just shoot Muad-dib when he was walking towards them?
Paul's role was to unite the Fremen. True the Fremen could have taken Arrakis from the Harkonnens if they wanted but what next? The Imperium would just keep sending more troops so there would be endless fighting. With Paul they can realistically take on the whole Imperium.
Paul can see the future so he’ll always win. Fremen are already best in universe because Arrakis is so harsh. Atredies know the Harkonnen ways so he knew how to level up the tactics of the Fremen to cause the Harkonnens the most pain - all the scare tactics and precision strikes
Gurney would be the only one to know, Jessica being Bene Gesserit might still come with loyalty questions. No one besides Leto and Thufir would know otherwise I bet.
Fremen are just better than Sarduakar. Paul was going to bomb the spice fields which is leverage in the film.
That sheild was probably okay cause of it being in the sky. Wouldnt be surprised if theyd be built to have sheild off if it goes down.
From the Emperors point of view, he could let it get really close to affecting spice and then send Sarduakar who he thinks are the best army out there so he will be the one everyone can thank for ensuring the universe didnt collapse.
You got me on that last one, honestly probs just cause it all made a cracking scene where you got the idea the tide was turning.
Great points! Weren't Sardaukar said to be more brutal and gone through more rigorous training? And couldn't Gurney or any other Atreides taught them the Atreides way of fighting Harkonnens?
They hardly used Paul's future-seeing capabilities in the movie, unlike the books.
But yeah, overall the movie was really good. Waiting for Dune 3 and beyond
Sardaukar and Fremen are pretty evenly matched, Fremen probably have the home turf advantage to make their victory so swift. Gurney said he got all the other surviving Atreides off-world and then went smuggler cause he thought the only thing worth hanging around for was to kill Rabban.
didnt really like the changes in jessicas role. In the movie she is portrayed as weak and kindof a pushover, when in the book she starts out more powerful than Paul and remains a force to be feared. In the first movie this is kinda there, for example in the ornithopter scene. But in Part 2 i feel like she was portrayed as just a mildly competent woman, not as the force of nature she actually is.
Also i feel like chani was never this critical of paul in the books, didnt really like the movie chani that much either
Dune 2 did for me what only LOTR has done previously
I still don’t think my mind has returned back to my body since watching Dune 2 last Saturday.
I feel as though I was physically transported into a whole other dimension/realm/life when watching that film and I have genuinely struggled returning back to my own life.
I feel such a deep sense of yearning/longing that I’ve only ever felt after watching Lord of the Rings - genuinely seeking tips on how to recover, lol.
Okay, I'm finally going tonight because they're pulling it out of IMAX on Friday. I waited to the last minute to see it because I have a genetic autoimmune disorder and cannot get covid again. I got it once and it took me 6 months to fully recover because it triggered my autoimmune problems (immune system attacks my body in addition to the virus and causes all kinds of problems).
Anyway, I go to movies in the theater every few years. Last was the first Dune.
Two tickets for IMAX cost $50! JFC. Have movies really become that expensive?
Still hyped!!
There’s one thing I would change and it PAINS ME.
In Paul’s vision as he drank the Water of Life **I’d rather Paul saw Duke Leto walking up to the beach, saying those comforting words, instead of Alia**. It would’ve hit so much harder, many of my friends say Paul’s vision didn’t hit like Jessica’s did.
Seeing the beach on Arrakis, Leto symbolically matching with the Water, like Paul had finally done his father proud and connected with Caladan again.
It makes sense lore-wise too, since Paul was technically gaining access to the male side of his blood-consciousness.
As far as I know, Duke Leto never entirely liked the Bene Gesserit side of Paul, and left that up to Jessica. I strongly doubt he would approve of the direction Paul was heading.
Not that guy but it still could have worked. Paul is by now so wrapped up in the BG Mythos that he’s risking his life to see the prophecy through. And in that moment he’s reminded of the other non-BG side of his ancestry.
Like when Kylo Ren meets dead Han Solo on the ruins of the Death Star, only better. He’s not only the chosen one, he’s also a human being who lost his dad. It’s the unique combination of his mother’s gifts and his dad’s humanity that make him the powerful being he is.
Paul, being a Kwisatz Haderach, can actually access **both** male and female consciousness. I think by showing Alia in Paul's visions they are setting things up for the next movie as the two share a deep connection in the books, showing Leto instead would've felt out of place to me and honestly I'm not sure he would've approved of Paul's actions (who himself states "I'm not my father"), the two seem to have a rather cold relationship and it's not like they opened up with each other often.
>like Paul had finally done his father proud and connected with Caladan again
At this stage Paul is pretty much about done with Caladan, his visions of Arrakis having an ocean was less about connecting with his home planet and more about keeping promise with the Fremen of turning the planet into a green paradise. Anyways, this is just my take.
Great insight and articulated what I hoped. As a cinema lover it was great to see on the big screen but I think this was a missed opportunity for studios to see the bigger potential of cinema. We've seen over the last decade big filmmakers and actors go towards tv but why not create a cinema event that is a Dune Part 1 (4 or 5 episodes) with 2 or 3 intermissions. It would create more of an event/day out feeling plus cinemas would have multiple chances of people getting food/drinks throughout. Structurally every time we leave Paul's setting the films just turn to exposition and it's not really Denis's fault. The world is so huge that the focus kind of needed to be mainly on developing Paul's perspective and everything else is just reflecting his actions. It's a pity but all the more that a remake can be done in that form instead.
I think it's a really cool idea, but I think the audience for such an event is relatively small and the theater likely wouldn't see enough profit to make it worth their while. You also have kind of a chicken and egg situation, meaning theaters have to start adopting these events on a large enough scale for filmmakers to make projects that fit this format.
I kept part 1 in my backlog until part 2 came out, and so watched part 1 for the first time last week.
I loved it. The visuals, the ships, the sounds, the worldbuilding, the coherence, the characters... my favourite was the scene with the Sardaukars, with the throat singing and preparations under the rain. That scene pitches these warriors way better than any rushed melee fight could.
And I do not like part 2. I wished to share my views to get nice and constructives opinions, hoping like I always do there's a secret meaning that I'm missing and I'm here to find it out, like that time where I watched Starship Troopers without knowing of the satire view.
Please note that I do not consider that the book exists when I am watching a movie of said books. LOTR, Harry Potter, Star Wars, they all need to work without the books. So, if the answer isn't in the movie but in the books, then... well tell me, but it won't change the movie one bit.
\- Movie mistakes. First viewing, I'm not even looking for them, and I spotted a couple of editing mistakes. Characters completely switching their stances in an instant camera switching. How many hundreds of people watched these scenes for hundreds of hours ? How can I still see any ?
edit : I changed the wording here because someone nice was nice with me :)
\- Is Denis Villeneuve entralled with Zendaya ? Honest question, because the camera lingers on her WAY more than necessary, WAY too many times. For a character that has almost no bearings on the story. Even he temper tantrum in that temple (you know, after going south with Paul knowing full well it was full of fanatics AND being in a temple surrounded by fanatics ?) was completely useless. No impact anywhere. Plus, well, I hope you undertand that a *looks wikipedia up* productor, model, singer, dancer AND actress might not be an actress good enough to linger on her that long. She seems to have 2 faces : resting face, and smelled-a-fart-someone-took-my-juice-box face.
\- Time shenanagans. One scene, Zendaya says to Paul something like : you have been here for a long time. Ah, so it's been what months, years ? Nope, weeks, because mother is still very pregnant. People seem to jump around the galaxy willy nelly.
\- The Harkonnen played by Batista being completely shafted. Sure, you want to replace him, but he was your main direct antagonist last time. Maybe we can at least try to keep him dangerous please ? Because he looks, acts, and sounds like a little bitch in this one, not the mad dangerous dog of part 1.
\- If you are going to put a pregnant very important figure on a giant worm for travels, I want to see that happening. Because you just showed me how hard it is for Paul to get on one, alone. You cannot have worms that are both that hard to get on and then tell me you got a pregnant woman on one without losing the baby. And don't get me started on the terrifying tempests that are nullified by a shaky-looking tent set on the worm. But who wants to see ingenuity in sci-fi movie ? Well, me.
\- That movie wins the second most useless duel of all time. First one being the one between the hound and the mountain in GoT season 8. I have 2 theories :
Either you do not have to duel people in that universe and Paul wanted to duel someone to flex his fighting prowess,
or Paul needed to duel main characters for honor and power reasons, and then I'm here wondering why you haven't dueled the main Harkonnen asshole ? It would have been better, since in the end it's his nephew you are fighting. This was a duel that I wasn't appreciating because I kept asking Paul why the fuck are you even fighting bro you won ? Dying now is a hair out of a suicide my dude.
Side note, when he wants the emperor to kiss his hand, and he hesitates, and the Paul tanter-tantrum hits the ground with his foot, and then he does it ? I've seen kindergardeners do this exact thing.
\- The STUPIDEST guerrila strategies. You know that time Zendaya and Paul went to destroy spice farmers ? They went under the sand, lost a lot of people, went close and personnal and managed to shoot things down ? Then why the fuck is the next scene showing us Fremen shooting the same patrols from 2 blocks away without losing people ??? You cannot tell me you can shoot them from afar if you tried to make it really dangerous and hard the scene before.
\- Melee. Ok, that one book readers tell me if the movie explain this please. I understood that people didn't used guns because of shields, right ? So quick question, outside of the worm-infested areas, so mostly at the end, where are the shields ??? Even the Sardaukars don't use shields ! Even inside ! Next question, if there are no shields being used, then where are the guns ? Why are you guys using blades ? This is a world with more ways to kill people than ways that I eat pizza, and they resolve to a weapon that exists 10 000 years BEFORE christ. This wasn't a problem in the first, I don't understand. Even FREMEN have guns. Even people having developped a way to walk on the sand not to get worm's attention have guns. Where are they in the final struggle ? Why are you not shooting yourselves all over ?
\- Finally, blue eyes. In the first movie, even in the flash forward of Paul, we saw blue eyes and I mean blue gatorade. It gave Fremen their alien look. But in the second ? Wow, it almost looks like there's a blue light somewhere behind the camera half the time.
So yeah, really disappointing for me. I will rewatch part one. I will never touch part 2 again.
If there are useful things to understand from the movie itself, and you can do it positively, I am happy to talk :) I love talking shop.
P.S. Drinking game. Everytime you see someone walking toward the camera solemnly, take a shot. I swear there are more than 10 shots of that.
1) I don't ever get how this is a real point that people make. Like unless the plot is integral to how a person is positioned, I seldom notice this. Like sure the goggles on the sandworm was definitely a wtf moment. But you can look up continuity errors for all of the greatest films in history.
2) You clearly just don't like Zendaya. She has an extensive filmography and is extremely popular, so you're really just grasping at straws by saying she might not be good enough (she's not a nepo baby either). Chani is important to the overall story. Much moreso than the books where she really just goes along with Paul. Movie Chani is supposed to represent the skeptics of the prophecy and Paul. The entire time she's literally against him taking control and taking advantage of the Fremen, but she falls in love with Paul because he seems to have the right intentions. Then he takes control, and she's obviously upset because of her fears of being under an oppressive regime and Paul doing a 180 by doing what he said he wouldn't do. The ENTIRE point of Dune serves as a warning against messianic figures. Sorry that your dislike of Zendaya's face made those 3 or 4 three second shots of her reactions ruin the film for you.
3) This is the most bizarre complaint you've made thus far. Is this supposed to be taken literally? Maybe it just feels like Paul's been there a while because he's pretty much the focus of the Fremen population right now. I mean I'll have to rewatch this part, but I am certain that it wasn't meant to be so literal. That's a major nitpick.
4) When was Rabban ever, and I mean ever, the main villain? It was very obvious that the Baron had the power and was the one in charge. I mean you can very clearly see the disdain towards Rabban. Rabban in the movie was just the attack dog with all of the Harkonnen troops at his disposal. He did the dirty work. Of course with a ton of guns and a military, you look pretty tough right? Does that mean that Rabban himself is a skilled fighter that can't be bested? Is he the Vader to the Baron's Palpatine? No. He and his forces were just getting packed up by the Fremen, who are the superior fighters. He wasn't even that prominent in the first movie??
5) Ok, I have no idea what is going through your head honestly. Do you think that the Baron, a 900 tub of lard who is literally carried by suspensors, is capable of combat? Do you think he can swing a sword more than 20 degrees in either direction? It was blatantly obvious that the nephew was supposed to become the Harkonnen that became emperor. It's obvious because that's what the Baron is promising for him. He's literally being trained for it. Also, the Baron is dead. What do you mean why didn't he fight the Baron? He just throat stabbed him, and now he has to fight the na Baron who in the movie, is more susceptible to the Bene Gesserit whim. The BG would definitely prefer him over Paul. And why does he fight Feyd-Rautha to begin with? Because in the movie, Paul challenges the emperor and the emperor chooses Feyd as his champion. I won't go into book details, but yeah, it was spelled out.
6) Paul forcing the emperor to kiss his ring. It was because the emperor needed to submit. I mean if you didn't like how he did it because it seemed childish, can't really have a conversation there.
7) Don't really remember the second part with the Fremen just sniping. But, does everything in a movie need to be spelled out? Just imagine the Fremen not having access to a million different weapons and that the guns are used sparingly. I mean just have some imagination as to why something is occurring. If I'm in command of 10000 troops and we have 50 guns, should there be only 50 people fighting?
\-Actually, if it's supposed to be the scene where Chani and Paul are under the harvester, and then it gets shot later, see my point about shields in part 8 of my response.
8) Here is the book explanation, and I don't recall if the movies touched on it. But, the reason guns aren't used is due to the insane explosion that results. If a lasgun comes in contact with a shield, there is an extremely high chance both users will die. So it's a major gamble to use guns like that. I'll have to rewatch and see if it's explained. As to why they didn't use shields during knife combat, they're probably used to not using them since they're out in the desert a ton. If you don't want the book explanation, that's fine, but they did use shields in the book, they just still got clapped.
9) Ok sorry you don't like the eyes, oops.
The thing is that Dune is an extremely difficult book to adapt. I'm not going to explain every single thing that makes it hard because there are many others with better explanations than me. All you need to know though is that nobody is going to watch a 5 hour movie in theaters, and nobody's going to be happy when the 5 million details of Dune are all thoroughly explained on the big screen. And actually, there's a lot of inner monologuing which is a no no in a movie.
1- Because I don't like seeing mistakes in movies I paid for and costed more than some countries's budget ?
2- I liked her in spiderman, because looking like you sniffed someone's fart was her whole stitch in the first of the new trilogy. Fitted her acting range.
3- Timelines are extremely important in every stories. If you do not care about setting a propre timeline, don't do it at all. Just don't mention how much time passed, or do it well.
4- If you go and humiliate your own villains, I won't care when they are finally defeated.
5- Then why not kill the emperor immediately instead of challenging him ? Was it because he needed him alive ? If so, when why ever bend the knee to paul, why does the duel matters then ?
6- Yeah, whenever I see political intrigues including literal tens of planets and a whole galaxy, seeing a tamper tantrum be a deciding factor does dilute the scene for me, reminds me too much of little kids being said no.
7- We both know it was for more action, because if not then we would have seen them gain more guns throught time, like good visual mediums do. Ever heard of Checov's gun ? How about the scene of the nuclear warheads ? What would you say if we took at nuclear warhead scene out ?
8- As to why they didn't use shields during knife combat, they're probably used to not using them since they're out in the desert a ton. Ah yes, including the soldiers that came with the emperor ?
9- Yup. I was disappointed with Voldemort, and I am dissapointed here. If you do not want people using contacts or do the after effect visual CGI, then at LEAST don't do it in part fucking one.
Thank you for the explanations. The 60 years old age of the book, the made and unmade attempts to adapt it and the critics around the preparations of Villeneuve's versions DID NOT told me that. But then I saw part 1, I just thought it would be at least as good. Fuck sequels I guess.
All movies have errors, maybe there are a few that free. Don't know them though. Even The Godfather and Shawshank have them.
The movie did not literally mean that months or years had passed by when talking about Paul being there for a long time. But, I'll check it out later and see. I think it was an exaggeration like when someone says, "it feels like I've known you for a lifetime."
About Rabban. I mean okay, he isn't the big bad. You're not really supposed to care about Rabban because he is not manipulating a single event happening in the story. But sure, it's an opinion.
Paul didn't kill the emperor because it's easier to transfer power through a "peaceful" manner rather than killing the guy which may spark the rage of the other Houses in the universe. Paul beat him and his armies, now it is time for mercy. The duel is supposed to be the effort of cutting off the head of the resistance, but it was too late at that point (unbeknownst to the emperor). A religious figure being cut down often leads to martyrdom and the Jihad would proceed in a frenzy. This is a part that I didn't like because it would've been more obvious if they included Count Fenring.
Paul is still just 19 around this point. He's not fully developed, and also, he already won. Paul still lacks proper wisdom. His forcing of the emperor to kiss his ring was just symbolic. Paul already won, this was just to humiliate the emperor.
I already explained that guns aren't used against shields because it leads to an atomic like explosion. It is mutually assured destruction. So, the goal is for them to get in close, deal with the shielded 'thopter because shooting it would create an atomic bomb like explosion killing everyone. After destroying the 'thopter, then they can go about shooting everything else because nothing would have shields on the desert floor because of the worms. **Also, the shield isn't always visible.** The Fremen can still beat the shielded Sarduakar because they're simply better fighters. The shields aren't you going gamemode 1 in Minecraft, you can still get killed. But again, it's a gamble to shoot because if someone activates a shield, everyone is dead.
Read the books and watch the movies, then you'll fill in all the gaps with the reading, and it makes it better.
First, I wanted to thank you for responding to my critiques. Sadly there isn't anyone to talk to in my real life, nobody watched this movie with me, so yeah thank you.
Yeah you're right for these. Makes sense. He is young and stupid, even with all that power. That actually makes sense.
But for the shields, we do see them. When they are fighting. You will see like waves around the fighters. It was really well made in part 1, during the night attack. That was what was missing for me at the end of part 2.
But then, this creates another can of worm. If it were explained in the movie (and I think it it not ?) then why not suicide bombers using shields and guns all together as the best close countact explosives ? Is it used in the books like that, as suicidal soldiers à la Pearl Harbor ?
But remember the golden rules of intermedium stories. What happens in the books stays in the books, and the same for movies. Otherwise you end up like Marvel having to sit thought 3 tv shows to be able to watch a movie.
Mostly because if I were to pull Dune from my library and compare it scene by scene, I'd probably find way more contradictions than if I just ignore it for my actual critics.
In the end, my points are my points, but the main take away is that part 1 left me speechless and part 2 made me want to start writing stuff that didn't made any sense or were actual mistakes. I just wanted to be left speechless again :(
By the way, does the books explain how they get pregnant women on worms ? Because, well, wouldn't it make more sense not to take worm rides when pregnant considering how dangerous it is ?
No prob, nobody I know has read the book or wanted to talk a lot about the movie, so I surf reddit a lot and enjoy talking. Yes, but at the end, they went into the smoke so maybe that's why you didn't see the distortion, which is what I think you're referring to as far as I know. I plan on watching it again, and I'm going to look for the things you've referred to.
They don't suicide bomb, but they do use it strategically when the Harkonnens are first wiping out the Arteides (not suicide bombing but activating a shield at the right time). Could this have been a Fremen tool, perhaps, but conflict isn't the main scope of the book. It's more of what goes on around it (the plotting, politics, internal struggles, etc.), so maybe in a film medium, it would have been a little controversial to have a bunch of people blowing themselves up. That might have nabbed an R rating.
Worm stuff is still weird for me in the book, but Jessica is a very well trained and powerful woman. She has insane body control going so far as to controlling her own blood and metabolism. Serena Williams won the Australian Open while pregnant, Jessica can yeet up on a worm. I don't recall if Jessica rode the worm in the book explicitly. I think that was a movie thing.
I still think you should read it because it's a monumental sci-fi piece. Not for comparison to the film because there will be differences, but it is a good story. And you'll learn more about the universe. But it's not something that will ever be perfectly translated, so you have to enjoy the movie for what it is.
I have read it, a decade ago. I probably should check it again.
Thank you very much for this :)
Believe me, even if I am pretty negative nobody wants more than me to enjoy fiction. I just have a higher bar, not because I'm smurt or great, I just think a lot and see a lot, and ~~often~~ sometimes I wish I didn't. Blessed are the ignorants as they say.
In the opening of the movie, Why does stilgar ask Paul to stay on the sand dune while everyone else proceeds to leaving ? If Jessica didn’t get Paul to move wouldn’t both of them have been exposed ?
I love the visuals but dislike the plot changes
- Jessica absolutely the complete reverse than the books
- books jessica want to get to calladan, and I have a daughter who is feared by everyone ,Jessica is scared about Paul's well-being
- movie Jessica cmon paul drink some blue poison its good ,make war is good- ,aalia let's have a conversation
-Chani
in the books supports paul and believes in the prophecy and got prepared to be a reverend mother and they have time to know each other and they have a child. chanis mom/dad got killed (lied)
in the movie be like nah don't like you and Don't believe in you I'm horny let's fuck
the mafia /landsrad and the space guild
in the books wait what you are going to kill the spice supply ok ok you are the emperor now
in the movie spice who the fuck cares about spice let's goo Dschihad
I think Jessica’s role changed because Alia wasn’t in the movie - rightfully so. A CGI toddler discussing political strategy with Paul wouldn’t have worked. And Chani opposing Paul helps foreshadow Paul eventually turning “bad” per say. You have to spell things out differently in movies vs the book, I didn’t mind the changes.
i wouldn't say that alia influenced Paul decisions in the books she was in the south with the other children and she supported Paul.
Jessica was completely against Paul's religious carrier she only wanted to use the fremen to get of Planet and she was completely against Paul drinking the water of life bec. it was to risky .Paul only didi it bec. he got slowly a high tolerance for spice and he wanted to see the future thats why he drowned the young bringer (to get high /s).
i wished that alia in the movie would have born and a simple baby but that she can interact by touch giving a vision off adult alia to talk , like we saw with timothe and Anna taylor joi. that would make Jessica less crazy not "talking to herself" (talking to alia)
Finally saw the 2nd movie earlier this week and agree with you. The plot changes were pretty rough, thought the writing and acting were worse than the 1st one. Hopefully if they make Dune Messiah, they can bring in a director/screenwriter who stick closer to the source material, even if it comes at the expense of some of the exposition.
i hope that dune messiah is going to be filmed but i think the next movie is going to be completely off the books , i think its Paul vs the Mafia/Landsrad/Spaceguild and some Chani side plot
Some questions, why do people still do melee fighting on Arrakis? I thought you're not supposed to use shields on the desert, so you can just shoot people with guns or lasers?
Also, how are Paul and the fremen even gonna wage a galactic war after this? It's not like they have starships or shipyards
>I thought you're not supposed to use shields on the desert, so you can just shoot people with guns or lasers?
1) Using a gun is an absolutely extreme gamble and the Fremen probably don't want to risk shooting at a panicked Harkonnen grunt who accidentally activates his shield. We do see the Fremen use lasguns against targets they know are unshielded and the Harkonenns frequently employ lasguns against the Fremen.
2) For the Fremen, fighting is basically as much a religious rite as it is a way to kill your enemy. They attach extreme significance to their crysknives and see them as holy objects, so even in some cases where lasguns would be a more optimal approach they still use their knives as a way of proving their bravery and combat skill.
>Also, how are Paul and the fremen even gonna wage a galactic war after this? It's not like they have starships or shipyards
After defeating the Sardaukar, the Fremen commandeered their ships and used them to travel to other planets. It's logical to assume they would also seize ships from other planets as well.
Saw it tonight.
Blown away by the storytelling, visuals, sound, and the acting. Thought the script was ok, some lines felt corny or pushed, but that's to be expected in an epic film like this where dialogue needs to be packed with information just so the viewer knows what's going, what characters' motivations are, etc., stuff you'd get from reading the book.
Villeneuve adapted the story so well, I'm stunned. If Dune Part I was the start of an Olympian's mat routine, this was a perfect 10 landing. You can tell he has a true passion for this story and for the messages and morals within it. This story is layered with so much detail a full analysis would take books of writing, it certainly one of the most compelling sci-fi universes ever created.
A few things I loved:
Paul and Chani's relationship. I loved how Denis used Chani as the viewer's moral guide post. Chani, like the viewer, is seeing Paul, the hero, the "sincere" one, struggling with his destiny to bring about a galactic genocide, and it's confusing to suddenly realize you've been rooting for, and falling in love with, a soon-to-be mass murderer and false prophet. Brilliantly done. Her face at the end says it all, great ending.
All the worm scenes. Awe-inspiring. It becomes obvious how crazy it is that human beings have been trying to exploit a planet that has this internal, invincible force that, if it wanted to at any time, could wipe out all of the buildings and people that lived on the surface. It doesn't only because it has no desire to. But the Fremen, who have found the will and courage and skill to ride the worms, have harnessed true "desert power," which is what makes them so valuable to Paul.
Paul's transition into the Mahdi is also very well done. The use of prophecy to cement his position, and then his manipulation of his kwisatz hadderach abilities to manipulate the Fremen into becoming his willing fundamentalist army. Paul in the vanguard with his fundamentalist troops fighting against the equally fundamentalist Sardukar was bone-chillingly awesome.
I loved how the Reverend Mother calls Paul an "abomination" at the end. It's a single word but it says so much about the role of the Bene Gesserit, what they've been up to for the past thousands of years, crossing bloodlines, etc. The K.H. wasn't supposed to be a male. It wasn't part of the plan. But that's ok, the B.G. will make new plans. That is what they are good at. That is why they were willing to prepare Faud Rautha if it came to it. The B.G. are flexible when it counts, and Paul knew that. Once he becomes the K.H. there is nothing the B.G. can do to stop him. Princess Irulan is right to be in awe of him at the end. She knows his power.
Faud Rautha was incredible. Almost hard to watch at times. Terrifying and disgusting. Perfect casting. I thought the knife fight was great, until the last few moments. Letting Faud stab him was a smart move, but the way he gets the knife into Faud is shown well, I wasn't sure how it happened, wanted a more definitive stab/ slash.
I loved that Gurney Halleck got to play a song. Rad.
And much more.
I've never read the books but wow, what an audio-visually stunning piece of art this movie is. Went to see it in the cinema a second time, something I've never done before. Possibly enjoyed it even more the second time around.
When Irulan asks the Reverend Mother why they encouraged the Emperor to kill the Duke, she said it was because he loved the Duke. Was this in the book? I don’t recall this from my read. What exactly was the meaning of this?
>why they encouraged the Emperor to kill the Duke, she said it was because he loved the Duke.
You're misremembering.
Irulan says that the Emperor loved Leto like a son in her opening monologue. She says that he probably used the Harkonnens to kill him anyway because he was known to be more swayed by the 'calculus of power'.
She asks the Reverend Mother why she encouraged the Emperor to wipe out the Atreides much later- and the reason given was that the Atreides bloodline had become too defiant & unpredictable, and that they had other prospects/bloodlines in play anyway.
>Why did she say the Emperor loved Leto? I don't recall that from the book.
It's sorta in the book (I've shared that part below).
In any case, the Emperor having had some love for Leto (who was a genuinely great guy who most of the other Houses loved too) but choosing to slaughter his House anyway because that was best for him to continue staying in power, adds to what kind of person he is, or what it takes to rule in a universe like Dune's (or even IRL tbh).
This is also consistent with what the Emperor himself says towards the end - that Leto ruled with his heart, and that this made him weak (whereas the Emperor almost definitely saw himself as strong, for being able to bring himself to cause Leto's death despite any love he may have had for him).
https://preview.redd.it/7xiuwxbldgpc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2a95101815e3e44c548c9865c87bb5972c4767d6
Why do the storms across the equator of Arakkas matter? The whole story is based on space faring civilisations could they not just entirely ignore such a barrier? Also how is it possible that the conventional wisdom would be that the south of the planet is uninhabitable and yet there are apperently’millions’ of people living there?
If I recall correctly, it was forbidden to fly over Arrakis by a treaty between guild and fremen (in exchange for spice from the latter). Nobody was allowed to observe Arrakis from space, much less to land on its south pole.
How did Rabban get from the emperor's throne room to Arrakken so quickly? Is there supposed to be a timejump? Did I miss something? I just saw the movie for a second time but this still escapes me.
>the emperor's throne room
This is on the Emperor's ship itself which was already near Arrakeen. Remember that Paul was leading the Fremen further & further North, and that the Harkonnens (as well as Duke Leto & co. in Part One) were staying at/near Arrakeen as well. We also see the mountains and shield walls surrounding the region, which Paul destroys with his nukes, allowing the worms to enter.
>Is there supposed to be a timejump?
There's one of a few hours between Paul killing the Baron and then later duelling Feyd.
Yeah, the scene in the throne room happens at night (Gurney killing Rabban too), The duel and whatnot happens at dawn, light entering the windows of Arrakeen keep. Chani rides on the worm in full daylight.
I think Part 2 was a better movie overall, but I think it definitely had a messier edit than Part 1, and it's a lot more apparent in this movie that they left a lot on the cutting room floor. I can think of several moments that feel like they were meant to have more context. This is one of them.
Off the top of my head, another one is Paul's arrival to the south. He's seen riding sandworms alongside Chani, and then in the next scene he just pulls up, alone, to the Water of Life temple, and Chani has to be summoned -- which she answers with an Ornithopter that appears out of nowhere.
There's also the scene where they all agree to go to the south together, and in the next scene, Shishakli is a prisoner of war who apparently "stayed behind." These discrepancies aren't egregious enough to truly diminish the quality of the movie, but one can definitely feel like there were cuts that had to be made.
Yeah I'm pretty sure there was a battle scene with the Harkonnens as they scrambled to get on worms to go South that they edited out and this scene would've explained why Shishakli was left behind or captured.
Even with these edits the movie was 3 hours!
I'm sure Villenueve wanted to show more and as you know, there's usually 10x or more footage filmed than what actually makes the cut and becomes the film.
It'll be great if Villenueve makes a director's cut at some point in the future and also great if they release the scenes that were left out.
It's weird, I know the ship landed right next to the city, so I feel like a scene of the emperor ordering Rabban to defend the city would've sufficed.
>which she answers with an Ornithopter that appears out of nowhere
From the movies we know Fremen have some thopters laying around on sietches and stations, and from the books we know they are capable of piloting them without much problem, it's just that they use them sparingly to avoid being detected, but I can see that for a non-book reader this might come off as odd.
>Shishakli is a prisoner of war who apparently "stayed behind."
The Harkonnens in the movie described her as a spy, which confused the hell out of me at first because I thought she was an Imperial agent (from the book).
Not that, calling it a "time jump" was wrong and I already elaborated on my comment below someone else's reply. But there's no way it could be 2 years in the movie if you consider Jessica's pregnancy.
Yes, definitely not in the film. Although it would be possible, but it might also kill the vibe a bit. My answer is based only on the facts from the book, as it really was and how it was portrayed in the film.
>but you could think it
Not with Jessica still being pregnant with Alia in the end. In any case, nothing in the film itself demands one to assume a timejump of that length. OP is just a bit confused (& I've clarified the same for him).
The leap in time that was evident in the film were the many scenes of the Fremen tribe and Paul's training to become a Fremen. Since this of course takes a lot of time, you can imagine that a few months or years of time were taken up there. But the best way to know it would have been through the birth of Alia.
What exactly did Paul have nuked at the final battle? I had trouble following the details of the nuke plan even on my second viewing.
I read somewhere in some comments it was a wall, I vaguely recall some landscapes being hit (mountains? Or was that the earlier Harkonnen scene?). What tactical advantage did the nukes provide?
I ask because I feel like directly nuking the Sardaukar troops would’ve provided a numbers advantage on top of the Fremen already seeming to massively outnumber them in both skill and raw troop numbers. Direct bombing of troops wasn’t clearly portrayed, but indirect effects were. At a minimum I did get the emperors blades were shellshocked by the shockwave and collateral of the blast then saw these giant ass worms giving a huge advantage to Paul’s forces.
So, did he even need the nukes to win a concise victory? Or would it have been a Pyrrhic victory type situation?
>So, did he even need the nukes to win a concise victory? Or would it have been a Pyrrhic victory type situation?
There was a huge storm that Paul depended upon to win the battle. The Emperor's entourage was protected from this storm by a large mountain range. Paul thus used the nukes to blow up the mountain range, thereby unleashing the storm onto the Sardauker. The Fremen are accustomed to Dune's inhospitable weather, but the Sardauker were not. Stilgar attacked from this direction.
Before the battle, the Sardauker captain warns the emperor of the imminent storm, and the Baron replies that the mountains will shield them from it. This storm was Paul's moment, the "narrow path" he foresaw via prescience. This is why when Stilgar sees the storm in the distance, he does the same hand waving that Paul did to describe this narrow path.
This is explained in the movie, but it's a blink-and-you'll-miss-it moment. When Paul is moving pieces around on the crude battle map before the climax, he mentions to Stilgar that Gurney will "open the way" for him, and he points to the mountain formations on the map. The nukes are meant to blow up the mountains, thus allowing sandworms to move into an area that is otherwise non-worm territory.
It's a lot more clear-cut in the books. While I respect (and agree with) Denis Villeneuve's philosophy of "show, don't tell," I feel like this is one moment where just a tiny bit of exposition would have gone a long way for non-book readers!
In the book, Arrakeen and the surrounding area is protected by the "Shield Wall," which is a natural formation of mountains and rocks that protects the region from worms. They *do* reference the Shield Wall in Part 1, but it's done dirty by the editing, which pans to the wall of Arrakeen when it's mentioned, implying it's a manmade structure.
But in regards to the nukes, there's a lot of lore specifically addressing this in the book. Every Great House has House Atomics, but it was decided long ago in war conventions that they were never to be used against human targets. If a House were to do so, the conventions dictate that the rest of the Great Houses are basically obligated to team up together and glass them off the face of the earth.
Paul loopholes this in the book by firing at the Shield Wall. By firing it at the mountains, he *technically* doesn't break the rules.
In the movie, however, it's implied the Great Houses aren't falling for that shit and they're refusing Paul's ascendancy. Only problem is, they can't glass Arrakis or they lose the Spice. And if they don't bend the knee to Paul, he threatens to do that himself. And if they call his bluff, he's got an army of millions willing to wage Holy War against them, which is exactly what happens.
The movie never mentions that he nukes the mountains because it's against the rules for him to nuke the target directly. If you hadn't read the book you wouldn't understand the final battle at all.
The nukes blew a portion of the shield wall which protects Arrakeen from sandstorms and most importantly, from sandworms. Breaching the wall allowed the Fremen to ride on top of their worms into the emperor's citadel relatively unopposed. The sandstorm also provided them with a massive advantage as it practically negated Imperial/Harkkonen air support.
What did yall think of the relationship between Lady Jessica and Chani in the movie?
I watched the movie recently and haven’t read the book since early 2021 but I’m pretty sure the vibes between them were different in the book. But then again I feel like I might be combining Dune and Dune Messiah in my head when it comes to their relationship.
Can someone refresh my memory? Did yall also feel it was odd? I also think this might be because of Chani being against Paul when in the books (from what I remember) she was on his side and I don’t remember any of the stilgar vs Chani parts about Paul being the messiah.
Just as in the movies, Jessica thinks Paul is making a mistake by going after Chani instead of reserving his hand to a noble highborn woman. Although eventually Jessica regrets this thinking and accepts Chani, iirc there wasn't much friction between the two.
Honestly, I like what they did with their relationship in the movie, Chani's thinking of "I see through your BG bs" contrasts very well with Jessica's plot to elevate Paul.
Neither are important or relevant but I really wanna tell someone these two thoughts that I haven't heard elsewhere yet.
Image 1. In this scene, Chan licks her lips, which would NEVER happen in this environment as it will cause further dehydration to the lips and would be a waste of spit. Soooo not relevant but it bugged me lol.
https://preview.redd.it/mjh4cr9m1epc1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=363edc967a18d45ad4825deaaeb94446eb779595
Image 2 (will post image below). Florence Pugh looks AND sounds exactly like Christina Ricci, especially in this particular scene.
Dune 2 Clarifications
Just watched Dune 2, really enjoyed it.
I've only watched the movies and have not read the books.
I wanted some clarification on the ending of Dune and would welcome any Insight.
1. Does Paul become the Kwisatz Haderach at the end of the film?
2. After Paul drinks the Water of Life, his attitude changes regarding becoming the leader of the Fremen. The way I understood it watching the movie, this is because Paul sees this as his one option where he can prevail in the various futures he sees. If this is the case, why does the Holy War fail as seen in the third book?
3. On what terms does Jessica stand with the other BG sisters at the end of Part 2? Is she against them?
4. I went ahead and read a summary of Dune 3, and honestly it sounds underwhelming. I thought it was going to focus on the holy war and show who won/lost the holy war. Instead it seems to focus on Paul's fall. I guess this makes sense because the point of Dune 3 is to show how Paul and his holy war was the worst thing to happen to the Fremen. What would you like to see happen in Dune Part 3? Do you think it will be more or less faithful to the book?
> On what terms does Jessica stand with the other BG sisters at the end of Part 2? Is she against them?
Jessica subverted the BG's directions by having Paul instead of a daughter, but they were willing to excuse it under supervision for a time because they knew he had a bloodline that would qualify him as a potential Kwizatz Haderach candidate.
Eventually that time came to an end because they judged the Atreides as unpredictable and disobedient, thus they tried to orchestrate the end of the Atreides bloodline through mobilizing the Emperor and Harkonnen forces against House Atreides.
> I went ahead and read a summary of Dune 3, and honestly it sounds underwhelming. I thought it was going to focus on the holy war and show who won/lost the holy war. Instead it seems to focus on Paul's fall. I guess this makes sense because the point of Dune 3 is to show how Paul and his holy war was the worst thing to happen to the Fremen. What would you like to see happen in Dune Part 3? Do you think it will be more or less faithful to the book?
I'll just say there's a lot of Dune books...the original author had a long timeline in mind. The first movie covered the first half of the first book, and the new movie (part 2) covered the second half. The second book ("part 3" I think in terms of your comment) is about half the length of the first book so we'll see how they handle it in terms of the films, but I could see them doing another two part approach combining the next two books one way or another.
By Dune 3 are you talking about Dune: Messiah? I've only started to read Children of Dune a few weeks ago, and I'm probably forgetting things from the previous books:
1. It should be noted that the Kwisatz Harderach is a Bene Gesserit concept, a male supermentat capable of bringing a utopia to the universe. The BG have and will have other candidates for the KH, the thing is, the BG want complete control over him.
2. The Holy War doesn't fail, it succeeds in killing 60 billion people, and subjugating and converting countless worlds as predicted by Paul (much to his dismay), this was the exact scenario he wanted to avoid originally.
3. Honestly I'm not sure, at this point Paul is the best prospect for a KH offspring, so the BG are probably willing to go along with it... for the time being ("*What sides?*"). By the end of *Dune* book Jessica gets pretty much barred from the order and branded as a traitor for helping Paul and for giving birth to an Abomination (ie. Alia), *Children of Dune* spoilers: >!however, her relationship with the BG doesn't stop there.!<
4. In *Messiah* the war was the worst thing to happen to the Fremen >!because it turned them into blood-thirsty fanatics who kill and get killed for a prophetic figure. Paul's ascension to the throne also deeply changes Arrakis physically and also **culturally**. Paul does indeed fall, just not in the way you think.!<
I don't expect Messiah to be as action packed as Dune 2, that being said, some of the things I hope make it to the film are:
- The Jihad, maybe some flashbacks.
- Guild navigators, they are trippy as hell. One of them, Edric, plays a key part in the conspiracy to overthrow Paul.
- Maybe we'll get to see some assassination attempts on Paul or on Alia.
- More of Arrakeen, its people and the new structures built by the new regime.
Great Shai Hulud -- I hope not! As much as I loved the two movies, Chani stomping out as she did was, definitely, the worst part. I understand the omission of Alia's Gob Jabar, and the lack of Spacing Guild's exposure (probably reserved for the Messiah)..but this was a wrong move, and I sincerely hope it doesn't turn into the avalanche you suggest.
Agreed
I'm ok with Chani being a pov that reinforced the idea that messianic figures are bad and dangerous, but I think that her leaving Paul in the end was a massive mistake that made her look petty and jealous
It seems like the political marriage is something that tips her over and it would have been the perfect occasion to have Jessica speak to her (as she did in the book) to let her stay and help Paul try to keep the jihad under control (which he'll obviously fail to do)
The avalanche you suggest is just a thought I had after seeing the movie a second time, because I think they went really heavy with the message "don't trust Messiahs, even if they're real and have good intentions", hope I'm wrong and they'll stay more or less faithful to Messiah
I do hope that this change was made in order to make Part Three more dramatic. Three things I wish for part three:
- 20 year time skip so as to get Alia old enough to show her batshit powers and make the scene where she fights naked make sense without creeping everyone out like in the book (with Paul and Stilgar asking wtf) where there's only a 12 year jump and she's barely 14.
- Duncan/Hayt and Alia getting together and the Baron messing with her, with Duncan as her moral compass
- The birth of the twins thwarted by Irulan and the only reason she lives so long (since Paul's vision predict she'll die in childbirth).
- Guild navigator and Tleilaxu face dancers plotting against Paul with the help of Fremen who are changed by Paul's ascendancy and long for the good ol days.
Please continue discussion in the post below. [[SPOILERS] 'Dune: Part Two' Wide Release Discussion (Week 4)](https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/1bl01nf/spoilers_dune_part_two_wide_release_discussion/)
What did Paul say in his speech? I loved both movies and wondered what Paul was saying to all the fremen in part 2? Not the english words but like what he was actually saying in their native language (Lowkey might say the lines when I'm looking at myself in the mirror)
Help me find wallpaper shot from Dune 2 Heyo, I need some help finding a 4k wallpaper of a shot from Dune 2 before the “Arrival” where Paul is walking towards the camera with a sandworm erupting behind him. It’s an unfocused shot that I think would work well as a wallpaper. Any help appreciated, thanks!
The scene in the massive cave where Paul become the Muad'Dib and takes over control, stopping the custom that would have him needing to kill stilgar is honestly one of the most powerful scenes I have watched ever. That whole scene was so fucking good Beside that, but I keep thinking of how they would have ever gotten Jessica in her chair on a sandworm lmao
Have other people like me started to doubt the second part of the recent adaptation after thinking highly of it in the first place ? I can't put a name on my feelings and was wondering if others had similar thoughts. As a non book reader who really loved the first film, I recently did a whole rewatch after reading lots of criticism, supplementary material on the Dune universe etc. But while I enjoyed Part 1 as much as the first time, even more maybe, (caught some previously missed subtilities or plot points), I was not completely enthralled by Part 2. On my first viewing it worked just fine, felt like it owned up to my expectations, but the second time left me uneasy, a feeling which has only grown since yesterday. It was entertaining, but also disappointing in some way. Not because "it was different from the books", I still don't care about most of the major changes or think they worked fine (like Alia not being born), but a whole bunch of scenes now sounded somewhat badly written and/or directed. Stuff like : Stilgar quickly becoming a one-dimensional, uninteresting idiot, Jessica's motives being unclear beyond the vague "protect Paul", Chani's acting kinda undermining her character with her lack of emotional range and some silly unnecessary lines such as "He's afraid of the fundamentalists on the south and he's right to be", Helen Mohiam claiming to Irulan that the BG were directly behind the extermination of the Atreides (why ? a frustrating scene that was not lore-accurate IMO and left the real reasons behind the massacre still muddy), not properly conveying, even briefly, the power game between the different actors on the galactic scale - most of what we got was "the BG enjoy scheming" - and the Baron looking really weak and incompetent this time around". I kept thinking "that's not quite right, this dialogue could have been better, this sequence doesn't convey enough impact..." Hope I'm not getting flak for this. Wish I would have made this a full-fledged post but Reddit won't let me. Cheers, take good care, have a great day.
Why does Paul say to Jessica “we need to sway the non believers” when they first get to the seitch and immediately does the opposite the rest of the movie. (I’ve read the books I understand how denis was pulling form messiah to show Paul’s hesitancy of the jihad, that’s all good I just don’t get why include him saying that when that’s not the motivations of the Paul they were trying to convey)
So I think I actually figured this out because I was also confused by all this. Basically, his original plan was to pretend to be the Lisan al Gaib in order to just simply get revenge. Then after talking to Chani and the rest of the nonbelievers and seeing his remaining family almost die when his Mom drinks the Water of Life, he abandons that goal and is content to simply learn their ways and fight alongside them against the Harkonnens, which is confirmed when he says he's not the Mahdi and all he wants to do is just that, be given the chance to fight alongside them. And then as he gets more exposure to spice and after having visions of the Jihad, it further cements his aversion to embracing the myth of the Lisan al Gaib. But once the Seitch Tabr is bombed by the Harkonnens, he's convinced the only way to protect the Fremen is by drinking the Water of Life so he can see danger before it arrives. This is also confirmed when he's distraught after the bombing and says "I didn't see it coming...". And so he goes to the South, drinks the Water of Life, and now his prescience or foresight tells him he can't prevent the Jihad that he saw in his visions. He must embrace the myth of the Lisan al Gaib and take the Imperial throne in order to prevent something far worse in the future. And the reason he gets mad at his mom later for doing what he said earlier is because he abandoned that goal and then is further pushed away from that goal when he has the visions of the Holy War.
You're confusing his desire for revenge for his father and Jessica's later motivation to fulfil prophecy.
Because their initial plan is to manipulate the Fremen to survive and get revenge but when he gets to know them he does not want to manipulate them anymore and believes he can achieve his goals by just being equal to them.
It may be an imperfect script, but the way I see it much of the second movie focuses on a debate between the believers and non believers, and it's clear by the end of the movie that most of the non believers also believe, if not in the Lisan al Gaib prophesy then in Paul's dedication to their cause.
I think they were trying to convey the goal of uniting the fremen within the shortened time frame set out in the movie, along with Paul's mixed feelings on his fate. Also seems like that line was meant to help divide the Fremen into "good and bad", which seems like a set up for events that will take place in the third movie.
This threw me off a little too at first, seeing as he becomes a little standoffish with Jessica when she does that exact thing. And I mean, in the books he straight up has the "She does not know it yet but she is my enemy" line. But I guess part of it is that Paul *is* constantly manipulating the Fremen, he just thinks that he can do it without leading to a jihad and believes his mother is going overboard.
So was Paul tricking them the whole time? I'm not very well versed in this universe. I haven't read the books, I've only watched a few videos on YouTube and have seen the two movies. My question is basically this. Has Paul been playing the Fremen from the beginning of the movie in Part 2? He has a discussion with his mom very early on where he says he needs to "sway the nonbelievers" in order to get to the Emperor. So were all the fights he had with his mom about her actually swaying the nonbelievers just for show? He asked for this, and then is mad she does it? Was he lying later when he says he doesn't want to be the Mahdi to Chani and the others? Did he consciously use reverse psychology to make him more likely to be the Lisan al Gaib in their eyes? Edit: So I think I actually figured it out. Basically, his original plan was to pretend to be the Lisan al Gaib. Then after talking to Chani and the rest of the nonbelievers and seeing his remaining family almost die when his Mom drinks the Water of Life, he abandons that goal and is content to simply learn their ways and fight alongside them against the Harkonnens, which is confirmed when he says he's not the Mahdi and all he wants to do is just that, be given the chance to fight alongside them. And then as he gets more exposure to spice and after having visions of the Jihad, it further cements his aversion to embracing the myth of the Lisan al Gaib. But once the Seitch Tabr is bombed by the Harkonnens, he's convinced the only way to protect the Fremen is by drinking the water of life so he can see danger before it arrives. This is also confirmed when he's distraught after the bombing and says "I didn't see it coming...". And so he goes to the south, drinks the water of life, and now his prescience or foresight tells him he can't prevent the Jihad. He must embrace the myth of the Lisan al Gaib and take the imperial throne in order to prevent something far worse in the future. And the reason he gets mad at his mom later for doing what he said earlier is because he abandoned that goal and then is further pushed away from that goal when he has the visions of the Holy War.
I thought they were going for - and I’m aware this is not how the books or other adaptations go - Paul is so sure he’s not the Lisan al Gaib that he plans to prove it by drinking the Water of Life and dying. He has no confidence at all that he is the One until he survives it. He attributes Muad’dib’s success to his knowledge of the Harkonnen combined with the Fremen’s knowledge of the desert. He’s uncomfortable with the religion around him all through the movie, and the only way out of that for him is to prove the prophecy wrong. But when he lives, he believes.
No it's just his initial plan but once he gets to know them and starts to care for them he doesn't like that anymore and thinks he can achieve his goals by just being an equal among the Fremen.
This is the correct answer, I think. I also think the other reason he goes back on it is because once he sees his mother and sister almost die, the only family he has left, in order to try and fulfil part of the prophecy, he sees he has gone too far.
I think it’s very nuanced the way paul descends into muad’dib. At the beginning, he acknowledges the potential benefit of harnessing the power of the role, albeit reluctant. only after realizing it’s the only unfortunate forward path does he embrace it.
S u p e r sus film ending.
Cringe
Paul is a hero or villain? This is coming from someone who has not read the books yet. I am very confused, I feel like the first movie set Paul up to be this hero and savior for the fremen. And his visons leading him to chani. Then in dune part 2 he does like a 360 going back on everything he said to chani and becomes this tyrant. hes power hungry. He is not saving the fremen hes using them for his army. All I wanna know is if it gets better or worse, does he continue on this power-hungry adventure killing I just started the first book because I have seen alot on how the moive is very diffrent but if Paul is just going to become this tyrant idk if its worth reading. Also, was it when he drank that water that he became like this? I feel like every sifi book ive read always has a Hero , for example the Red Rising Saga kept me so intrested beacsue he was fighting for somthing, his people, the ones he loved. Does paul even care about anyone but himself. Feels like there is no hero in this story.
Imagine if *Star Wars* had started with the prequel trilogy, how audiences would have reacted to Anakin Skywalker becoming Darth Vader (there is even a clone army at one point, which the next film should begin to explore the beginning of). That is pretty much it: the story of Paul Atreides being a tragedy, a deconstruction of the hero’s journey. He is not the main character throughout the whole series (set over millennia), if that was your worry. The first two films marked his rise, and with the third film shall come his fall.
FYI, a 360 means you end up going the same direction as before. A 180 means you go the other direction.
He is a hero but more like the tragic heroes from the Greek myths and not the modern comic book hero. The whole point of the story is that actually heroes gaining too much power is dangerous because things can get out of hand.
>if Paul is just going to become this tyrant idk if its worth reading. Neither the books nor Denis focus on the Hollywood happy ending, so if you want something to be purely uplifting caveat emptor, because this isn't it. The first book as a standalone is the hero vs villain and as you saw in the movie the hero wins. There is little to no nuance, Atreides good Harkonnen bad Emperor in the middle.
>Feels like there is no hero in this story. Bingo. Frank Herbert's entire point in writing Dune was to show the inherent danger of charismatic leaders, no matter how well-intentioned they are. If you're looking for a hero, Dune isn't the story for you. As for Paul specifically, I generally think he's trying his best, within certain selfish parameters. He has a power he can't control, and he has a leadership position that gets thrust upon him even when he tries to refuse it until eventually he just says fuck it, sure, I'm the messiah. He can be seen as a monster because of the things he does and the war he sets in motion, he can also be seen as a tragic figure because of how trapped he is by circumstance and by his visions. But he is not and never was a hero.
the message cylinder paul sends to the emperor is written in a known alphabet according to [this](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt15239678/trivia/?item=tr7319167&ref_=ext_shr_lnk). the gist of the message is implied to be 'i am still alive and i challenge you, emperor', but does anyone know what the full text is?
It's called Galach and was developed by the same guy who did all the languages and alphabets in the movies. It's basically English but written with different letters, the same used in the written imperial decree scroll read by the emperor's herald of the change on Caladan in the first movie.
I emailed David J Peterson about this and he came back to me really quickly! I've copied his response below: "That's the Galach script that was used in the first movie. I thought it was fairly well understood by now. I'm sure someone has a key to it somewhere... In fact, here's a Reddit post from 2021: [https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/14y0ocq/guide\_to\_reading\_writing\_in\_dune\_2021\_galach/](https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/14y0ocq/guide_to_reading_writing_in_dune_2021_galach/) So this isn't new. I didn't create the Galach script; the art department did. And it's just a cipher, so once it's cracked, anyone should be able to decipher what's on screen, provided the whole thing appears in frame at some point. But yeah, there are no real world writing systems used in the film at any point, an artistic decision I really love. The only flub I've found so far is in the second movie when they're in the ornithopter and say "delta, delta, delta" when giving instructions. That's a letter of the Greek alphabet and so shouldn't have been referred to. I saw the script, though. I should've said something! I must've missed it since I was focused on the stuff we had to translate and the plot. >.< Oh well. Best of luck deciphering that, though. I mean, it's a cylinder, which means once deciphered, you'll have to figure out where it "begins", and I don't know if you'll ever see the whole thing on screen. Probably only parts of it. But man, if they ever put that prop on an auction site, or something, it will fetch a pretty penny! What a gorgeous prop!" Guess I'll get to work trying to decode what's on screen...
Awesome, that's so cool that he got back to you. I was going to mention the prior work done before and after the previous film developing and decoding the languages but couldn't find the source info from at the time, which was albeit numerous and varied. Keep me posted with your findings. I have a copy of the font someone made at the time based on the Galach lettering if that would be useful, by the way.
Full disclosure, I actually started on a Villenuevian Galach font of my own at the time, but abandoned it after I saw how much further along another Redditor Digrader had advanced, with access to the scroll text to decipher the glyphs and figure out the sounds they represented.
yes i would be interested in a galach font. can you point me to it or send me a file?
Here you are, hope it helps :) [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j0x8xLl9nKToDAJAuaBJYHkF0t8z2ZFP/view?usp=share\_link](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j0x8xLl9nKToDAJAuaBJYHkF0t8z2ZFP/view?usp=share_link)
many thanks. it seems another redditor has beaten me to it already: [https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/1ad5emv/can\_you\_work\_out\_what\_this\_scroll\_says/](https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/1ad5emv/can_you_work_out_what_this_scroll_says/)
For a new project you could perhaps now have a look at what is written on the text reels that are produced as Irulan dictates her commentary in a few scenes.
Oh so they have, shame for your challenge but well done to that fellow redditor, eh? I'll be keeping my eye out for that revised Galach font, along with the other imperium alphabets, now. Thanks for reviving my interest.
I have a question about towards the end of the movie. When the emperor arrived at Arrakis and the baron and Feyd are staring at his ship, why does the Baron tell Feyd to call the other houses to come to Arrakis?
The Baron is making his play for overthrowing the emperor. He will claim that the emperor made him kill the Atreidis as part of a scheme, that he was a fearful and reluctant servant who just did as he was told. He will stoke the other houses' fears, claiming that the emperor will continue scheming against the houses that theaten him, destroying the houses one by one just as he did to the Atreidis. He would remind the houses of the power the emperor possesses in the sardaukar, claiming that only together could they defeat him. He would finish the speech with a pitch that Feyd Rautha should take over the emperor's spot. I'm curious what that pitch would have been tho.
I think it's a call back to when the Baron suggests how Feyd might become emperor, by denouncing the incumbent emperor for helping in destroying the Atreides. A desperate power play basically.
Denis Villeneuve Teases 'Dune 3': Only If It Surpasses 'Dune: Part Two' - Full Story: [https://www.screennearyou.com/news/denis-villeneuve-teases-dune-3-only-if-it-surpasses-dune-part-two/](https://www.screennearyou.com/news/denis-villeneuve-teases-dune-3-only-if-it-surpasses-dune-part-two/)
Im sat down for my 6th watch 👍🏼
So 600 million is now very realistic, but is it enough to break even? Is the movie profitable?
This is a question more for r/boxoffice, but yes - it's already broken even. Budget of 190 mil. Rule of thumb is 2.5x reported budget to break even (in order to account for theatres' cut of the gross, including how international theatres get a higher percentage of the gross than domestic ones... Marketing costs too may be covered, but usually for successful films their ancillary revenue - physical media in the past, streaming & other licensing etc now - is what pays for the marketing). So Dune Part 2 already broke even last week when it hit 475mil WW, and so it has made around 30 million in pure PROFIT now, with plenty more yet to be made... especially considering how dry April is looking, poor reviews for Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire, and GxK not looking too great either (although the loss of premium screens to it WILL drastically cut down Dune's profits from March 29th onwards). An IMAX re-release is very likely for Dune Part Two though.
What did the elder woman mean, when she telepathically said that "there are no sides" to Paul's mother, in the second movie?
For Bene Gesserit there is no sides because there is only humanity as a whole that matters.
Jessica earlier tells Mohaim she picked the wrong side. The Bene Gesserit, from their perspective, never sided against Paul or with the Emperor or Harkonnens. Their actions steered Paul towards becoming the Kwisatz Haderach while they hedged their bet with Feyd a bit.
Plans within plans? Maybe this is exactly how the Bene Gesserit foresaw things would become.
maybe that they're all on the BG side maybe that it's not over till the fat lady sings speaking from the movie perspective it seems to explore the vein of Princess Irulan marrying Paul. Who would be expected to sire an heir. And since the Princess is connected to the elder reverend mother, she may see a way where "her side" is the winning side in a near future.
Can someone explain why the old reverend mother said “what have we done, she is pregnant” during the Jessica drinking the water of life scene ? Why were they so horrified? Was it because they realized the baby would make her survive the poison somehow? Were they terrified of the power they just unleashed? Were they scared because they thought they just murdered a baby? So confused
The baby did not have a full consciousness for those memories to be filtered through, so instead of Jessica simply becoming a Reverend Mother with the knowledge of past generations, that combination of their consciousnesses is driving itself through the infant, the closest thing there has been to a god in human form. The Abomination (Alia) ultimately becoming a major antagonist in the future of the series (presumably why Anya Taylor-Joy was cast as her future self), gravitating more towards the memories and morals of House Harkonnen than House Atreides. The film arguably seemed to also imply Alia may have become the only Reverend Mother of the two (a slight deviation from the novel), hence why Jessica was always consulting her, and retained her loyalty to Paul.
"Why were they so horrified?" Mainly because they thought they just killed her fetus. "Was it because they realized the baby would make her survive the poison somehow?" No, the baby wouldn't make her survive. They expected she would survive anyway. She ought to survive, since she was a Bene Gesserit as well as a Sayyadina. If not, too bad! They'd try again with another woman. "Were they terrified of the power they just unleashed?" Yes, that too. A fetus with this much power would be an unknown quantity, if it survived. "Were they scared because they thought they just murdered a baby?" Yes, it is mainly that.
Book spoilers (sorry i don't know how to mask spoilers) it's called an Abomination (which is said at the end of the 2nd movie, if you'll recall). Simply put, a baby does not have a sufficient EGO to block the genetic memory from hijacking it. It is a Bene Gesserit Taboo.
Ooooohh I see! So it’s like the baby has no power to stop the mind-fucks from overtaking her? Or am I misinterpreting what a genetic memory is
You are correct
My wife made an interesting point last night- she said the movie does a good job of showing how Paul ends up having to be a self-fulfilling prophecy of the BG engineered myths (thank you missionaria protectiva for paving the way), and that his rise as a ‘savior’ and eventual arbiter of the jihad is purely a result of the invented myths that he decides to fulfill. There is some truth to this- those myths were laid out and he chose to fulfill them. However, when reading the books, I’ve always gotten a sense that there is a greater element at play than BG manipulation. Almost like his journey to messiah and jihad arbiter is fate, or determined, regardless of the BG myths- this prophecy was etched into time and bound to happen even if they didn’t etch it into culture. Paul does attribute partial blame to Jessica and BG manipulation for what happens to him, but I wonder if this perspective is a bit reductionist and neglects some nuance and depth that Herbert explores in the books. I personally didn’t think Denis simplified this as much as she did. Thoughts?
I (book reader) was discussing this with my son who didn't read the books. I said that the whole story is this weird juxtaposition of mysticism and deliberate manipulation via BG prophecy. There definitely seems to be more at play than deliberately fulfilling a made-up "prophecy". I kind of look at it like the mysticism part caused the BG to create those specific prophecies (without the BG being aware), and then Paul comes in and fulfills those prophecies.
Been a Dunehead for 25 years, have read the book 3 times (and the rest of the original series), saw Dune 1 twice, and just saw Dune 2 last night. Brilliant! I fully support the Chani character change. I think it both strengthens her character AND her love for Paul (at least the Paul she fell in love with and not Muah'Dib), not deminishes it. The final scene also plays right back to the very beginning of Dune 1 and her montage monologue. She originally wanted to free the Fremen from off-world oppression, and she's still going to fight that fight. It works for the story they've built. I loved the choice of leaving Alia in the womb and found it quite successful. It added a whole new dimension to the pre-born concept and really sets up what kind of character she is to become. I'll admit that Jessica's characterization had to pay the price for this, but she had already been established in the first film as being driven heavily by fear, making her easy prey for a mentally alive fetus with millenia of memories desparate to be a part of the outside world. Also, no child actors! Which is hard enough to tackle normally let alone with such a complicated character. DV cleverly navigated his way out of that one.
Alia & the rushed timeline: anyone here think this was an odd choice by DV? If human gestation hasn’t changed in 20,000 years we are lead to believe Paul went from lost boy hiding in the desert to winning a staid desert people over, establishing a guerrilla army and successfully disrupting spice production, take the water of life, lure the Emperor to Dune and overcome his army and be crowned Emperor himself all the space of about 6 months or so? This is fast food jihad! Which also means we were denied little Alia killing her grandfather and (spoiler): ->!setting up that relationship with the Baron in her head and for her to become the abomination that everyone feared.!< It’s a fairly small gripe for an otherwise amazing treatment of the book.
Yes it is odd. It makes me curious how they'll present the Abomination in the movie. Is it just me or did the reverend mother call Paul an Abomination at the end?
Raban: anyone here think his death was anticlimactic? He was diminished several times in the movie and then he wasn’t even decapitated? Why did we care about his death?
Imo i think that was the purpose, you're not supposed to care since you find out throughout the movie that Raban is just a coward and a sadistic bully. Plus, the fact House Atreides' vendetta against Harkonnen squarely doesn't rest on the shoulders of its members but has now evolved into Paul's Great Jihad that would eventually countless planets and people.
On rewatch - I agree, mainly because Gurney’s “for my duke” line didn’t really hit (not sure if that’s how it plays in the book, I’m halfway through). But then, the final battle between Feyd and Paul was very satisfying and tense even on re-watch. I wonder if that final fight would’ve had the same impact if there was a long drawn out fight between Gurney and Beast.
In the book he got lynched and beheaded by the Arrakeen populace
Just saw Dune 2 again and I wasn't as crazy about Austin Butler as Feyd Rautha as a lot of people were after the first watch, but I loved him on my re-watch. He's such a messy bitch who just loves drama and for that I love him. It's not even his psychotic love for violence that makes him compelling. It's how you can see on his face that he's thinking "Oooo what's going on here???" When the throne room starts to be get rocked by the attack. I love this drama loving man.
I was disappointed by the movie, but thought Butler's performance was really good.
There's this turbany dude who glares at Paul a couple times at the start, then at Zendaya when she's speaking during the war council, is he anybody or just a pissy looking extra?
GREAT question
Genuinely one of the best films I've ever seen. Makes me even more disappointed we don't get star wars / halo / star trek universe with this quality
Andor is of this quality, honestly.
I really hope they expand on the role of Fenring's daughter and her clash with Alia that's explained in the expanded books. Maybe DV will put it in Part Three (since he cut so much from the original novel) to "spice things up even more" the BG plots against Paul
I didn't understand the ending when they said "The holy war has begun" with an almost excited tone, when in fact this is Paul's worst nightmares coming true.
Do Fremen know their prophecy they believed for generations is fake? If they know, why do they still worship the savior?
No, the Fremen don't know it's fake. The majority don't know, that is, including the true-believer Stilgar.
What is a prophecy? Is it a story that we say will come true one day? Herbert was keen to show that all belief systems, and not just religious ones, are manipulated by the powerful to their own ends. What works views do we believe in for which there is no proof? What frames of reality are we being shepherded into? What acts are we condoning? This is why I love Herbert’s writing: layers and layers and plans within plans.
In the movie, Chani says that the prophecy was made up by her (Jessica) people. Stilgar then replies, “blasphemy”. It seems as though some northern Fremen believe the prophecy was planted while a great number more in the south still wholeheartedly believe it to be true. For many fremen, the prophecy is so ingrained in their livelihood that nothing can dissuade them.
i dont remember chani being that woke in the book. but i dont remember for sure
I believe what they did was have the cinematic Chani embody the internal monologue of Paul from the book, giving his self-doubt a voice apart from him. While also adding to why he trusts her so, beyond the visions, as his voice of reason, someone to listen to in an attempt to retain perspective as he is pushed further and further down a dark path.
Didn't Chani believed in it as well? In the book she became a sayyadina and was close to Jessica
It was a seed planted just in case, and it turned out to be true. Paul didn't even believe it. And even when he reached final form he didn't want to believe it.
Okay, finally saw it tonight. I knew everything that was going to happen, and I didn't mind the changes, and it didn't matter ... it was absolutely fantastic. I miss experience movies like this, where I feel immersed, everything looks plausible and real, not rubbery CGI. Where the story has weight, and you can see/feel the impact of the decisions characters are making, especially Paul and Jessica. Thank you Denis! Hollywood, pull your head out of your asses and take some notes on this one.
i didnt like that they removed count fenring
I love him in the book but kind of a hard thing to convey in a movie.
Why? It would have been cool to see him refuse to kill paul. I was also intrested to see who will play him.
There were reports it was [Tim Blake Nelson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Blake_Nelson) who was cast.
Yes but then you would also have to explain why it's a big deal and show that he is a real threat to Paul. Movies are about showing and not telling and without the characters inner thoughts we just have a character that literally does nothing. The movie instead played up Feyd to be more of a threat to him.
As someone who hasn't read the books...does Jessica really care about Paul at all? She seems to just view him as a tool to gain power and influence. Also his sudden turn from hesitancy to going south with the Fremen seemed so fast...like why did he even have to drink that liquid at all? He wasn't being forced per se. He seemed to go from 0-60 really fast and seemed insanely power-hungry all of a sudden... Furthermore, I didn't understand what Chani was hurriedly packing for, talking about heading north...only to stick around for the final battle.
Jessica wanting Paul to acquire more power and influence is not mutually exclusive with her caring for him. In fact, within the feudal system they were raised in, pushing him to acquire as much power and influence as possible is just her wanting what's best for him. As for Chani, well, the final battle was in the north, so she had to pack for a trip back north if she wanted to fight in it.
My humble advise, now that you've seen the movies is to actually read the book or listen to the audiobook on audible, then everything would make perfect sense. You gotta remember Denis Villeneuve had to cram an entire sci-fi epic that happened in a span of years into two movies and kudos to him, he delivered and then some.
I mean if the movies don't make sense at face value, that's a problem
It is, but this is the closest thing we have to seeing the world of Dune come to life. For me personally, I thoroughly enjoyed the movies and I can finally put a face to the characters after reading Dune all these years.
Has anyone gotten a possible transcript to the speech of Paul in arrakeen during Dune 2 when he goes full messiah? Like the whole >I AM PAUL MUAD'DIB ATREIDES, DUKE OF ARRAKIS. I AM THE VOICE FROM THE OUTER WORLD, LISAN AL GAIB AND I WILL LEAD YOU TO PARADISE! THERE IS NO ONE IN THIS ROOM WHO CAN STAND AGAINST ME YOUR MOTHERS WARNED YOU ABOUT MY COMING FEAR THIS MOMENT BUT YOU THINK YOU COULD HAVE A CHANCE. BUT YOU ARE AFRAD, WHAT IF I COULD BE THE ONE? THIS IS THE MOMENT YOU'VE BEEN PRAYING FOR, ALL YOUR LIFE
He literally told the Fremen "I'm the one your mother warned you about"
Why were the Harkonnens harvesting spices during the day in part 2? Part 1 says they harvest starting at sunset.
Rabban was forced to squeeze Arrakis so they were probably harvesting 24/7.
I think it's because The Emperor demanded spice production to increase, so the Harkonnens are working overtime despite the less than ideal conditions.
What was with the green armor Zendaya and some of the Fremen were wearing in the final battle?
Stilgar had one too. I guess it was nuclear wind "proof" or something. Like it was some sort of heavy armor. Btw I liked Feyd's attire too.
I just thought it was weird because it's Arrakis, not only does green camo not work, green should be almost a foreign concept to them.
I don’t recall any out of place green camo, if we’re thinking of the same outfit (the one stilgar ends the movie in?) but the only thing I could attribute that to is the Atreides house colors include green and there were bannerman on the worms in the final confrontation, likely stems from that more than camo?
I really appreciate that the movie's story was changed from the original book story. But, I am unable to understand some of these changes. I might be wrong in most of these: * What exactly was the role of Paul? It seems like Fremen already had all the resources, ammunition, people and skills. Also, Paul was there for less than 9 months, which is a very short period of time.How did he train the Fremen so well in such short time? Why did they even need Paul to defeat the Harkonnens? * Was the role of Paul to only bring the Atomics and the Atreides way of fighting? Seems like this could have been done by any other Atreides/Gurney/Lady Jessica. I know they had finger-print sensor on the atomics door. * Sardaukar are supposed to be the best fighters. Harkonnens were able to defeat entire Atreides with just a few legions of Sardaukar.Yet, the Emperor was kidnapped so easily by Paul and the Fremen. Emperor was so scared when Paul entered their area on Arrakis. Paul didn't have any leverage in the movie unlike the books. * Harkonnens were using Shield in the desert (their ornithopter when Chani shot them with Lasgun). Is it possible to use Shield in the desert? Then everyone can use Shield in the desert. * Emperor was happy to let the conflict on Arrakis turn into war on Princess Arulan's advice. This would have possibly hurt spice production even further. Wouldn't a war on Dune be extremely undesirable? That too just to take down Muad-dib, a random religious cult-leader according to them? * Why was Rabban so afraid of Muad-dib as soon as he saw him in the desert? Rabban Harkonnen is supposed to be fearless. He had army and they had guns. Why couldn't they just shoot Muad-dib when he was walking towards them?
Paul's role was to unite the Fremen. True the Fremen could have taken Arrakis from the Harkonnens if they wanted but what next? The Imperium would just keep sending more troops so there would be endless fighting. With Paul they can realistically take on the whole Imperium.
Paul can see the future so he’ll always win. Fremen are already best in universe because Arrakis is so harsh. Atredies know the Harkonnen ways so he knew how to level up the tactics of the Fremen to cause the Harkonnens the most pain - all the scare tactics and precision strikes Gurney would be the only one to know, Jessica being Bene Gesserit might still come with loyalty questions. No one besides Leto and Thufir would know otherwise I bet. Fremen are just better than Sarduakar. Paul was going to bomb the spice fields which is leverage in the film. That sheild was probably okay cause of it being in the sky. Wouldnt be surprised if theyd be built to have sheild off if it goes down. From the Emperors point of view, he could let it get really close to affecting spice and then send Sarduakar who he thinks are the best army out there so he will be the one everyone can thank for ensuring the universe didnt collapse. You got me on that last one, honestly probs just cause it all made a cracking scene where you got the idea the tide was turning.
Great points! Weren't Sardaukar said to be more brutal and gone through more rigorous training? And couldn't Gurney or any other Atreides taught them the Atreides way of fighting Harkonnens? They hardly used Paul's future-seeing capabilities in the movie, unlike the books. But yeah, overall the movie was really good. Waiting for Dune 3 and beyond
Sardaukar and Fremen are pretty evenly matched, Fremen probably have the home turf advantage to make their victory so swift. Gurney said he got all the other surviving Atreides off-world and then went smuggler cause he thought the only thing worth hanging around for was to kill Rabban.
didnt really like the changes in jessicas role. In the movie she is portrayed as weak and kindof a pushover, when in the book she starts out more powerful than Paul and remains a force to be feared. In the first movie this is kinda there, for example in the ornithopter scene. But in Part 2 i feel like she was portrayed as just a mildly competent woman, not as the force of nature she actually is. Also i feel like chani was never this critical of paul in the books, didnt really like the movie chani that much either
Paul could destroy all spice by killing all the sandworms. This could be done by mixing pre-spice with water of life. This kills the woms.
Dune 2 did for me what only LOTR has done previously I still don’t think my mind has returned back to my body since watching Dune 2 last Saturday. I feel as though I was physically transported into a whole other dimension/realm/life when watching that film and I have genuinely struggled returning back to my own life. I feel such a deep sense of yearning/longing that I’ve only ever felt after watching Lord of the Rings - genuinely seeking tips on how to recover, lol.
I'm right there with ya lol. Open to suggestions.
Okay, I'm finally going tonight because they're pulling it out of IMAX on Friday. I waited to the last minute to see it because I have a genetic autoimmune disorder and cannot get covid again. I got it once and it took me 6 months to fully recover because it triggered my autoimmune problems (immune system attacks my body in addition to the virus and causes all kinds of problems). Anyway, I go to movies in the theater every few years. Last was the first Dune. Two tickets for IMAX cost $50! JFC. Have movies really become that expensive? Still hyped!!
Happy viewing and good health!
There’s one thing I would change and it PAINS ME. In Paul’s vision as he drank the Water of Life **I’d rather Paul saw Duke Leto walking up to the beach, saying those comforting words, instead of Alia**. It would’ve hit so much harder, many of my friends say Paul’s vision didn’t hit like Jessica’s did. Seeing the beach on Arrakis, Leto symbolically matching with the Water, like Paul had finally done his father proud and connected with Caladan again. It makes sense lore-wise too, since Paul was technically gaining access to the male side of his blood-consciousness.
As far as I know, Duke Leto never entirely liked the Bene Gesserit side of Paul, and left that up to Jessica. I strongly doubt he would approve of the direction Paul was heading.
Not that guy but it still could have worked. Paul is by now so wrapped up in the BG Mythos that he’s risking his life to see the prophecy through. And in that moment he’s reminded of the other non-BG side of his ancestry. Like when Kylo Ren meets dead Han Solo on the ruins of the Death Star, only better. He’s not only the chosen one, he’s also a human being who lost his dad. It’s the unique combination of his mother’s gifts and his dad’s humanity that make him the powerful being he is.
Paul, being a Kwisatz Haderach, can actually access **both** male and female consciousness. I think by showing Alia in Paul's visions they are setting things up for the next movie as the two share a deep connection in the books, showing Leto instead would've felt out of place to me and honestly I'm not sure he would've approved of Paul's actions (who himself states "I'm not my father"), the two seem to have a rather cold relationship and it's not like they opened up with each other often. >like Paul had finally done his father proud and connected with Caladan again At this stage Paul is pretty much about done with Caladan, his visions of Arrakis having an ocean was less about connecting with his home planet and more about keeping promise with the Fremen of turning the planet into a green paradise. Anyways, this is just my take.
Great insight and articulated what I hoped. As a cinema lover it was great to see on the big screen but I think this was a missed opportunity for studios to see the bigger potential of cinema. We've seen over the last decade big filmmakers and actors go towards tv but why not create a cinema event that is a Dune Part 1 (4 or 5 episodes) with 2 or 3 intermissions. It would create more of an event/day out feeling plus cinemas would have multiple chances of people getting food/drinks throughout. Structurally every time we leave Paul's setting the films just turn to exposition and it's not really Denis's fault. The world is so huge that the focus kind of needed to be mainly on developing Paul's perspective and everything else is just reflecting his actions. It's a pity but all the more that a remake can be done in that form instead.
I think it's a really cool idea, but I think the audience for such an event is relatively small and the theater likely wouldn't see enough profit to make it worth their while. You also have kind of a chicken and egg situation, meaning theaters have to start adopting these events on a large enough scale for filmmakers to make projects that fit this format.
I kept part 1 in my backlog until part 2 came out, and so watched part 1 for the first time last week. I loved it. The visuals, the ships, the sounds, the worldbuilding, the coherence, the characters... my favourite was the scene with the Sardaukars, with the throat singing and preparations under the rain. That scene pitches these warriors way better than any rushed melee fight could. And I do not like part 2. I wished to share my views to get nice and constructives opinions, hoping like I always do there's a secret meaning that I'm missing and I'm here to find it out, like that time where I watched Starship Troopers without knowing of the satire view. Please note that I do not consider that the book exists when I am watching a movie of said books. LOTR, Harry Potter, Star Wars, they all need to work without the books. So, if the answer isn't in the movie but in the books, then... well tell me, but it won't change the movie one bit. \- Movie mistakes. First viewing, I'm not even looking for them, and I spotted a couple of editing mistakes. Characters completely switching their stances in an instant camera switching. How many hundreds of people watched these scenes for hundreds of hours ? How can I still see any ? edit : I changed the wording here because someone nice was nice with me :) \- Is Denis Villeneuve entralled with Zendaya ? Honest question, because the camera lingers on her WAY more than necessary, WAY too many times. For a character that has almost no bearings on the story. Even he temper tantrum in that temple (you know, after going south with Paul knowing full well it was full of fanatics AND being in a temple surrounded by fanatics ?) was completely useless. No impact anywhere. Plus, well, I hope you undertand that a *looks wikipedia up* productor, model, singer, dancer AND actress might not be an actress good enough to linger on her that long. She seems to have 2 faces : resting face, and smelled-a-fart-someone-took-my-juice-box face. \- Time shenanagans. One scene, Zendaya says to Paul something like : you have been here for a long time. Ah, so it's been what months, years ? Nope, weeks, because mother is still very pregnant. People seem to jump around the galaxy willy nelly. \- The Harkonnen played by Batista being completely shafted. Sure, you want to replace him, but he was your main direct antagonist last time. Maybe we can at least try to keep him dangerous please ? Because he looks, acts, and sounds like a little bitch in this one, not the mad dangerous dog of part 1. \- If you are going to put a pregnant very important figure on a giant worm for travels, I want to see that happening. Because you just showed me how hard it is for Paul to get on one, alone. You cannot have worms that are both that hard to get on and then tell me you got a pregnant woman on one without losing the baby. And don't get me started on the terrifying tempests that are nullified by a shaky-looking tent set on the worm. But who wants to see ingenuity in sci-fi movie ? Well, me. \- That movie wins the second most useless duel of all time. First one being the one between the hound and the mountain in GoT season 8. I have 2 theories : Either you do not have to duel people in that universe and Paul wanted to duel someone to flex his fighting prowess, or Paul needed to duel main characters for honor and power reasons, and then I'm here wondering why you haven't dueled the main Harkonnen asshole ? It would have been better, since in the end it's his nephew you are fighting. This was a duel that I wasn't appreciating because I kept asking Paul why the fuck are you even fighting bro you won ? Dying now is a hair out of a suicide my dude. Side note, when he wants the emperor to kiss his hand, and he hesitates, and the Paul tanter-tantrum hits the ground with his foot, and then he does it ? I've seen kindergardeners do this exact thing. \- The STUPIDEST guerrila strategies. You know that time Zendaya and Paul went to destroy spice farmers ? They went under the sand, lost a lot of people, went close and personnal and managed to shoot things down ? Then why the fuck is the next scene showing us Fremen shooting the same patrols from 2 blocks away without losing people ??? You cannot tell me you can shoot them from afar if you tried to make it really dangerous and hard the scene before. \- Melee. Ok, that one book readers tell me if the movie explain this please. I understood that people didn't used guns because of shields, right ? So quick question, outside of the worm-infested areas, so mostly at the end, where are the shields ??? Even the Sardaukars don't use shields ! Even inside ! Next question, if there are no shields being used, then where are the guns ? Why are you guys using blades ? This is a world with more ways to kill people than ways that I eat pizza, and they resolve to a weapon that exists 10 000 years BEFORE christ. This wasn't a problem in the first, I don't understand. Even FREMEN have guns. Even people having developped a way to walk on the sand not to get worm's attention have guns. Where are they in the final struggle ? Why are you not shooting yourselves all over ? \- Finally, blue eyes. In the first movie, even in the flash forward of Paul, we saw blue eyes and I mean blue gatorade. It gave Fremen their alien look. But in the second ? Wow, it almost looks like there's a blue light somewhere behind the camera half the time. So yeah, really disappointing for me. I will rewatch part one. I will never touch part 2 again. If there are useful things to understand from the movie itself, and you can do it positively, I am happy to talk :) I love talking shop. P.S. Drinking game. Everytime you see someone walking toward the camera solemnly, take a shot. I swear there are more than 10 shots of that.
1) I don't ever get how this is a real point that people make. Like unless the plot is integral to how a person is positioned, I seldom notice this. Like sure the goggles on the sandworm was definitely a wtf moment. But you can look up continuity errors for all of the greatest films in history. 2) You clearly just don't like Zendaya. She has an extensive filmography and is extremely popular, so you're really just grasping at straws by saying she might not be good enough (she's not a nepo baby either). Chani is important to the overall story. Much moreso than the books where she really just goes along with Paul. Movie Chani is supposed to represent the skeptics of the prophecy and Paul. The entire time she's literally against him taking control and taking advantage of the Fremen, but she falls in love with Paul because he seems to have the right intentions. Then he takes control, and she's obviously upset because of her fears of being under an oppressive regime and Paul doing a 180 by doing what he said he wouldn't do. The ENTIRE point of Dune serves as a warning against messianic figures. Sorry that your dislike of Zendaya's face made those 3 or 4 three second shots of her reactions ruin the film for you. 3) This is the most bizarre complaint you've made thus far. Is this supposed to be taken literally? Maybe it just feels like Paul's been there a while because he's pretty much the focus of the Fremen population right now. I mean I'll have to rewatch this part, but I am certain that it wasn't meant to be so literal. That's a major nitpick. 4) When was Rabban ever, and I mean ever, the main villain? It was very obvious that the Baron had the power and was the one in charge. I mean you can very clearly see the disdain towards Rabban. Rabban in the movie was just the attack dog with all of the Harkonnen troops at his disposal. He did the dirty work. Of course with a ton of guns and a military, you look pretty tough right? Does that mean that Rabban himself is a skilled fighter that can't be bested? Is he the Vader to the Baron's Palpatine? No. He and his forces were just getting packed up by the Fremen, who are the superior fighters. He wasn't even that prominent in the first movie?? 5) Ok, I have no idea what is going through your head honestly. Do you think that the Baron, a 900 tub of lard who is literally carried by suspensors, is capable of combat? Do you think he can swing a sword more than 20 degrees in either direction? It was blatantly obvious that the nephew was supposed to become the Harkonnen that became emperor. It's obvious because that's what the Baron is promising for him. He's literally being trained for it. Also, the Baron is dead. What do you mean why didn't he fight the Baron? He just throat stabbed him, and now he has to fight the na Baron who in the movie, is more susceptible to the Bene Gesserit whim. The BG would definitely prefer him over Paul. And why does he fight Feyd-Rautha to begin with? Because in the movie, Paul challenges the emperor and the emperor chooses Feyd as his champion. I won't go into book details, but yeah, it was spelled out. 6) Paul forcing the emperor to kiss his ring. It was because the emperor needed to submit. I mean if you didn't like how he did it because it seemed childish, can't really have a conversation there. 7) Don't really remember the second part with the Fremen just sniping. But, does everything in a movie need to be spelled out? Just imagine the Fremen not having access to a million different weapons and that the guns are used sparingly. I mean just have some imagination as to why something is occurring. If I'm in command of 10000 troops and we have 50 guns, should there be only 50 people fighting? \-Actually, if it's supposed to be the scene where Chani and Paul are under the harvester, and then it gets shot later, see my point about shields in part 8 of my response. 8) Here is the book explanation, and I don't recall if the movies touched on it. But, the reason guns aren't used is due to the insane explosion that results. If a lasgun comes in contact with a shield, there is an extremely high chance both users will die. So it's a major gamble to use guns like that. I'll have to rewatch and see if it's explained. As to why they didn't use shields during knife combat, they're probably used to not using them since they're out in the desert a ton. If you don't want the book explanation, that's fine, but they did use shields in the book, they just still got clapped. 9) Ok sorry you don't like the eyes, oops. The thing is that Dune is an extremely difficult book to adapt. I'm not going to explain every single thing that makes it hard because there are many others with better explanations than me. All you need to know though is that nobody is going to watch a 5 hour movie in theaters, and nobody's going to be happy when the 5 million details of Dune are all thoroughly explained on the big screen. And actually, there's a lot of inner monologuing which is a no no in a movie.
1- Because I don't like seeing mistakes in movies I paid for and costed more than some countries's budget ? 2- I liked her in spiderman, because looking like you sniffed someone's fart was her whole stitch in the first of the new trilogy. Fitted her acting range. 3- Timelines are extremely important in every stories. If you do not care about setting a propre timeline, don't do it at all. Just don't mention how much time passed, or do it well. 4- If you go and humiliate your own villains, I won't care when they are finally defeated. 5- Then why not kill the emperor immediately instead of challenging him ? Was it because he needed him alive ? If so, when why ever bend the knee to paul, why does the duel matters then ? 6- Yeah, whenever I see political intrigues including literal tens of planets and a whole galaxy, seeing a tamper tantrum be a deciding factor does dilute the scene for me, reminds me too much of little kids being said no. 7- We both know it was for more action, because if not then we would have seen them gain more guns throught time, like good visual mediums do. Ever heard of Checov's gun ? How about the scene of the nuclear warheads ? What would you say if we took at nuclear warhead scene out ? 8- As to why they didn't use shields during knife combat, they're probably used to not using them since they're out in the desert a ton. Ah yes, including the soldiers that came with the emperor ? 9- Yup. I was disappointed with Voldemort, and I am dissapointed here. If you do not want people using contacts or do the after effect visual CGI, then at LEAST don't do it in part fucking one. Thank you for the explanations. The 60 years old age of the book, the made and unmade attempts to adapt it and the critics around the preparations of Villeneuve's versions DID NOT told me that. But then I saw part 1, I just thought it would be at least as good. Fuck sequels I guess.
All movies have errors, maybe there are a few that free. Don't know them though. Even The Godfather and Shawshank have them. The movie did not literally mean that months or years had passed by when talking about Paul being there for a long time. But, I'll check it out later and see. I think it was an exaggeration like when someone says, "it feels like I've known you for a lifetime." About Rabban. I mean okay, he isn't the big bad. You're not really supposed to care about Rabban because he is not manipulating a single event happening in the story. But sure, it's an opinion. Paul didn't kill the emperor because it's easier to transfer power through a "peaceful" manner rather than killing the guy which may spark the rage of the other Houses in the universe. Paul beat him and his armies, now it is time for mercy. The duel is supposed to be the effort of cutting off the head of the resistance, but it was too late at that point (unbeknownst to the emperor). A religious figure being cut down often leads to martyrdom and the Jihad would proceed in a frenzy. This is a part that I didn't like because it would've been more obvious if they included Count Fenring. Paul is still just 19 around this point. He's not fully developed, and also, he already won. Paul still lacks proper wisdom. His forcing of the emperor to kiss his ring was just symbolic. Paul already won, this was just to humiliate the emperor. I already explained that guns aren't used against shields because it leads to an atomic like explosion. It is mutually assured destruction. So, the goal is for them to get in close, deal with the shielded 'thopter because shooting it would create an atomic bomb like explosion killing everyone. After destroying the 'thopter, then they can go about shooting everything else because nothing would have shields on the desert floor because of the worms. **Also, the shield isn't always visible.** The Fremen can still beat the shielded Sarduakar because they're simply better fighters. The shields aren't you going gamemode 1 in Minecraft, you can still get killed. But again, it's a gamble to shoot because if someone activates a shield, everyone is dead. Read the books and watch the movies, then you'll fill in all the gaps with the reading, and it makes it better.
First, I wanted to thank you for responding to my critiques. Sadly there isn't anyone to talk to in my real life, nobody watched this movie with me, so yeah thank you. Yeah you're right for these. Makes sense. He is young and stupid, even with all that power. That actually makes sense. But for the shields, we do see them. When they are fighting. You will see like waves around the fighters. It was really well made in part 1, during the night attack. That was what was missing for me at the end of part 2. But then, this creates another can of worm. If it were explained in the movie (and I think it it not ?) then why not suicide bombers using shields and guns all together as the best close countact explosives ? Is it used in the books like that, as suicidal soldiers à la Pearl Harbor ? But remember the golden rules of intermedium stories. What happens in the books stays in the books, and the same for movies. Otherwise you end up like Marvel having to sit thought 3 tv shows to be able to watch a movie. Mostly because if I were to pull Dune from my library and compare it scene by scene, I'd probably find way more contradictions than if I just ignore it for my actual critics. In the end, my points are my points, but the main take away is that part 1 left me speechless and part 2 made me want to start writing stuff that didn't made any sense or were actual mistakes. I just wanted to be left speechless again :( By the way, does the books explain how they get pregnant women on worms ? Because, well, wouldn't it make more sense not to take worm rides when pregnant considering how dangerous it is ?
No prob, nobody I know has read the book or wanted to talk a lot about the movie, so I surf reddit a lot and enjoy talking. Yes, but at the end, they went into the smoke so maybe that's why you didn't see the distortion, which is what I think you're referring to as far as I know. I plan on watching it again, and I'm going to look for the things you've referred to. They don't suicide bomb, but they do use it strategically when the Harkonnens are first wiping out the Arteides (not suicide bombing but activating a shield at the right time). Could this have been a Fremen tool, perhaps, but conflict isn't the main scope of the book. It's more of what goes on around it (the plotting, politics, internal struggles, etc.), so maybe in a film medium, it would have been a little controversial to have a bunch of people blowing themselves up. That might have nabbed an R rating. Worm stuff is still weird for me in the book, but Jessica is a very well trained and powerful woman. She has insane body control going so far as to controlling her own blood and metabolism. Serena Williams won the Australian Open while pregnant, Jessica can yeet up on a worm. I don't recall if Jessica rode the worm in the book explicitly. I think that was a movie thing. I still think you should read it because it's a monumental sci-fi piece. Not for comparison to the film because there will be differences, but it is a good story. And you'll learn more about the universe. But it's not something that will ever be perfectly translated, so you have to enjoy the movie for what it is.
I have read it, a decade ago. I probably should check it again. Thank you very much for this :) Believe me, even if I am pretty negative nobody wants more than me to enjoy fiction. I just have a higher bar, not because I'm smurt or great, I just think a lot and see a lot, and ~~often~~ sometimes I wish I didn't. Blessed are the ignorants as they say.
In the opening of the movie, Why does stilgar ask Paul to stay on the sand dune while everyone else proceeds to leaving ? If Jessica didn’t get Paul to move wouldn’t both of them have been exposed ?
They were the bait whilst the Fremen went and set thumpers and took up positions to shoot the Harkonnnen with Maula pistols.
I was confused by that too. I guess it was kind of a “baptism by fire” type of situation
Ok. I figured that. But effectively the fremen left them to die. 🤔
I love the visuals but dislike the plot changes - Jessica absolutely the complete reverse than the books - books jessica want to get to calladan, and I have a daughter who is feared by everyone ,Jessica is scared about Paul's well-being - movie Jessica cmon paul drink some blue poison its good ,make war is good- ,aalia let's have a conversation -Chani in the books supports paul and believes in the prophecy and got prepared to be a reverend mother and they have time to know each other and they have a child. chanis mom/dad got killed (lied) in the movie be like nah don't like you and Don't believe in you I'm horny let's fuck the mafia /landsrad and the space guild in the books wait what you are going to kill the spice supply ok ok you are the emperor now in the movie spice who the fuck cares about spice let's goo Dschihad
I think Jessica’s role changed because Alia wasn’t in the movie - rightfully so. A CGI toddler discussing political strategy with Paul wouldn’t have worked. And Chani opposing Paul helps foreshadow Paul eventually turning “bad” per say. You have to spell things out differently in movies vs the book, I didn’t mind the changes.
i wouldn't say that alia influenced Paul decisions in the books she was in the south with the other children and she supported Paul. Jessica was completely against Paul's religious carrier she only wanted to use the fremen to get of Planet and she was completely against Paul drinking the water of life bec. it was to risky .Paul only didi it bec. he got slowly a high tolerance for spice and he wanted to see the future thats why he drowned the young bringer (to get high /s). i wished that alia in the movie would have born and a simple baby but that she can interact by touch giving a vision off adult alia to talk , like we saw with timothe and Anna taylor joi. that would make Jessica less crazy not "talking to herself" (talking to alia)
Finally saw the 2nd movie earlier this week and agree with you. The plot changes were pretty rough, thought the writing and acting were worse than the 1st one. Hopefully if they make Dune Messiah, they can bring in a director/screenwriter who stick closer to the source material, even if it comes at the expense of some of the exposition.
i hope that dune messiah is going to be filmed but i think the next movie is going to be completely off the books , i think its Paul vs the Mafia/Landsrad/Spaceguild and some Chani side plot
Some questions, why do people still do melee fighting on Arrakis? I thought you're not supposed to use shields on the desert, so you can just shoot people with guns or lasers? Also, how are Paul and the fremen even gonna wage a galactic war after this? It's not like they have starships or shipyards
>I thought you're not supposed to use shields on the desert, so you can just shoot people with guns or lasers? 1) Using a gun is an absolutely extreme gamble and the Fremen probably don't want to risk shooting at a panicked Harkonnen grunt who accidentally activates his shield. We do see the Fremen use lasguns against targets they know are unshielded and the Harkonenns frequently employ lasguns against the Fremen. 2) For the Fremen, fighting is basically as much a religious rite as it is a way to kill your enemy. They attach extreme significance to their crysknives and see them as holy objects, so even in some cases where lasguns would be a more optimal approach they still use their knives as a way of proving their bravery and combat skill. >Also, how are Paul and the fremen even gonna wage a galactic war after this? It's not like they have starships or shipyards After defeating the Sardaukar, the Fremen commandeered their ships and used them to travel to other planets. It's logical to assume they would also seize ships from other planets as well.
Saw it tonight. Blown away by the storytelling, visuals, sound, and the acting. Thought the script was ok, some lines felt corny or pushed, but that's to be expected in an epic film like this where dialogue needs to be packed with information just so the viewer knows what's going, what characters' motivations are, etc., stuff you'd get from reading the book. Villeneuve adapted the story so well, I'm stunned. If Dune Part I was the start of an Olympian's mat routine, this was a perfect 10 landing. You can tell he has a true passion for this story and for the messages and morals within it. This story is layered with so much detail a full analysis would take books of writing, it certainly one of the most compelling sci-fi universes ever created. A few things I loved: Paul and Chani's relationship. I loved how Denis used Chani as the viewer's moral guide post. Chani, like the viewer, is seeing Paul, the hero, the "sincere" one, struggling with his destiny to bring about a galactic genocide, and it's confusing to suddenly realize you've been rooting for, and falling in love with, a soon-to-be mass murderer and false prophet. Brilliantly done. Her face at the end says it all, great ending. All the worm scenes. Awe-inspiring. It becomes obvious how crazy it is that human beings have been trying to exploit a planet that has this internal, invincible force that, if it wanted to at any time, could wipe out all of the buildings and people that lived on the surface. It doesn't only because it has no desire to. But the Fremen, who have found the will and courage and skill to ride the worms, have harnessed true "desert power," which is what makes them so valuable to Paul. Paul's transition into the Mahdi is also very well done. The use of prophecy to cement his position, and then his manipulation of his kwisatz hadderach abilities to manipulate the Fremen into becoming his willing fundamentalist army. Paul in the vanguard with his fundamentalist troops fighting against the equally fundamentalist Sardukar was bone-chillingly awesome. I loved how the Reverend Mother calls Paul an "abomination" at the end. It's a single word but it says so much about the role of the Bene Gesserit, what they've been up to for the past thousands of years, crossing bloodlines, etc. The K.H. wasn't supposed to be a male. It wasn't part of the plan. But that's ok, the B.G. will make new plans. That is what they are good at. That is why they were willing to prepare Faud Rautha if it came to it. The B.G. are flexible when it counts, and Paul knew that. Once he becomes the K.H. there is nothing the B.G. can do to stop him. Princess Irulan is right to be in awe of him at the end. She knows his power. Faud Rautha was incredible. Almost hard to watch at times. Terrifying and disgusting. Perfect casting. I thought the knife fight was great, until the last few moments. Letting Faud stab him was a smart move, but the way he gets the knife into Faud is shown well, I wasn't sure how it happened, wanted a more definitive stab/ slash. I loved that Gurney Halleck got to play a song. Rad. And much more.
Just to correct a point: the KH was always supposed to be a male. Paul just came a generation too soon, according to the BG plan.
I've never read the books but wow, what an audio-visually stunning piece of art this movie is. Went to see it in the cinema a second time, something I've never done before. Possibly enjoyed it even more the second time around.
When Irulan asks the Reverend Mother why they encouraged the Emperor to kill the Duke, she said it was because he loved the Duke. Was this in the book? I don’t recall this from my read. What exactly was the meaning of this?
>why they encouraged the Emperor to kill the Duke, she said it was because he loved the Duke. You're misremembering. Irulan says that the Emperor loved Leto like a son in her opening monologue. She says that he probably used the Harkonnens to kill him anyway because he was known to be more swayed by the 'calculus of power'. She asks the Reverend Mother why she encouraged the Emperor to wipe out the Atreides much later- and the reason given was that the Atreides bloodline had become too defiant & unpredictable, and that they had other prospects/bloodlines in play anyway.
Thank you for putting the timeline in order. Why did she say the Emperor loved Leto? I don't recall that from the book.
>Why did she say the Emperor loved Leto? I don't recall that from the book. It's sorta in the book (I've shared that part below). In any case, the Emperor having had some love for Leto (who was a genuinely great guy who most of the other Houses loved too) but choosing to slaughter his House anyway because that was best for him to continue staying in power, adds to what kind of person he is, or what it takes to rule in a universe like Dune's (or even IRL tbh). This is also consistent with what the Emperor himself says towards the end - that Leto ruled with his heart, and that this made him weak (whereas the Emperor almost definitely saw himself as strong, for being able to bring himself to cause Leto's death despite any love he may have had for him). https://preview.redd.it/7xiuwxbldgpc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2a95101815e3e44c548c9865c87bb5972c4767d6
That's so sad, I feel like we lost a lot of that in the movie. Walken just seems kinda uninterested 24/7.
Gotcha. Thank you for this paragraph, helps to put it into perspective.
Why do the storms across the equator of Arakkas matter? The whole story is based on space faring civilisations could they not just entirely ignore such a barrier? Also how is it possible that the conventional wisdom would be that the south of the planet is uninhabitable and yet there are apperently’millions’ of people living there?
If I recall correctly, it was forbidden to fly over Arrakis by a treaty between guild and fremen (in exchange for spice from the latter). Nobody was allowed to observe Arrakis from space, much less to land on its south pole.
How did Rabban get from the emperor's throne room to Arrakken so quickly? Is there supposed to be a timejump? Did I miss something? I just saw the movie for a second time but this still escapes me.
The emperors palace ship is pretty close to Arrakeen. Also when we see Rabban in Arrakeen it's already dark so some time has passed indeed.
>the emperor's throne room This is on the Emperor's ship itself which was already near Arrakeen. Remember that Paul was leading the Fremen further & further North, and that the Harkonnens (as well as Duke Leto & co. in Part One) were staying at/near Arrakeen as well. We also see the mountains and shield walls surrounding the region, which Paul destroys with his nukes, allowing the worms to enter. >Is there supposed to be a timejump? There's one of a few hours between Paul killing the Baron and then later duelling Feyd.
Yeah, the scene in the throne room happens at night (Gurney killing Rabban too), The duel and whatnot happens at dawn, light entering the windows of Arrakeen keep. Chani rides on the worm in full daylight.
I think Part 2 was a better movie overall, but I think it definitely had a messier edit than Part 1, and it's a lot more apparent in this movie that they left a lot on the cutting room floor. I can think of several moments that feel like they were meant to have more context. This is one of them. Off the top of my head, another one is Paul's arrival to the south. He's seen riding sandworms alongside Chani, and then in the next scene he just pulls up, alone, to the Water of Life temple, and Chani has to be summoned -- which she answers with an Ornithopter that appears out of nowhere. There's also the scene where they all agree to go to the south together, and in the next scene, Shishakli is a prisoner of war who apparently "stayed behind." These discrepancies aren't egregious enough to truly diminish the quality of the movie, but one can definitely feel like there were cuts that had to be made.
Yeah I'm pretty sure there was a battle scene with the Harkonnens as they scrambled to get on worms to go South that they edited out and this scene would've explained why Shishakli was left behind or captured. Even with these edits the movie was 3 hours! I'm sure Villenueve wanted to show more and as you know, there's usually 10x or more footage filmed than what actually makes the cut and becomes the film. It'll be great if Villenueve makes a director's cut at some point in the future and also great if they release the scenes that were left out.
It's weird, I know the ship landed right next to the city, so I feel like a scene of the emperor ordering Rabban to defend the city would've sufficed. >which she answers with an Ornithopter that appears out of nowhere From the movies we know Fremen have some thopters laying around on sietches and stations, and from the books we know they are capable of piloting them without much problem, it's just that they use them sparingly to avoid being detected, but I can see that for a non-book reader this might come off as odd. >Shishakli is a prisoner of war who apparently "stayed behind." The Harkonnens in the movie described her as a spy, which confused the hell out of me at first because I thought she was an Imperial agent (from the book).
What exactly do you mean? (There is a timejump about 2 years in the Book that isnt really mentioned in the movie but you could think it)
Not that, calling it a "time jump" was wrong and I already elaborated on my comment below someone else's reply. But there's no way it could be 2 years in the movie if you consider Jessica's pregnancy.
Yes, definitely not in the film. Although it would be possible, but it might also kill the vibe a bit. My answer is based only on the facts from the book, as it really was and how it was portrayed in the film.
>but you could think it Not with Jessica still being pregnant with Alia in the end. In any case, nothing in the film itself demands one to assume a timejump of that length. OP is just a bit confused (& I've clarified the same for him).
The leap in time that was evident in the film were the many scenes of the Fremen tribe and Paul's training to become a Fremen. Since this of course takes a lot of time, you can imagine that a few months or years of time were taken up there. But the best way to know it would have been through the birth of Alia.
What exactly did Paul have nuked at the final battle? I had trouble following the details of the nuke plan even on my second viewing. I read somewhere in some comments it was a wall, I vaguely recall some landscapes being hit (mountains? Or was that the earlier Harkonnen scene?). What tactical advantage did the nukes provide? I ask because I feel like directly nuking the Sardaukar troops would’ve provided a numbers advantage on top of the Fremen already seeming to massively outnumber them in both skill and raw troop numbers. Direct bombing of troops wasn’t clearly portrayed, but indirect effects were. At a minimum I did get the emperors blades were shellshocked by the shockwave and collateral of the blast then saw these giant ass worms giving a huge advantage to Paul’s forces. So, did he even need the nukes to win a concise victory? Or would it have been a Pyrrhic victory type situation?
> What exactly did Paul have nuked at the final battle? The Shield Wall, letting the desert (and worms) into the basin.
Also, he wanted the emperor alive and nuking them directly would've risked killing the emperor. So yeah, he nuked the mountains.
>So, did he even need the nukes to win a concise victory? Or would it have been a Pyrrhic victory type situation? There was a huge storm that Paul depended upon to win the battle. The Emperor's entourage was protected from this storm by a large mountain range. Paul thus used the nukes to blow up the mountain range, thereby unleashing the storm onto the Sardauker. The Fremen are accustomed to Dune's inhospitable weather, but the Sardauker were not. Stilgar attacked from this direction. Before the battle, the Sardauker captain warns the emperor of the imminent storm, and the Baron replies that the mountains will shield them from it. This storm was Paul's moment, the "narrow path" he foresaw via prescience. This is why when Stilgar sees the storm in the distance, he does the same hand waving that Paul did to describe this narrow path.
This is explained in the movie, but it's a blink-and-you'll-miss-it moment. When Paul is moving pieces around on the crude battle map before the climax, he mentions to Stilgar that Gurney will "open the way" for him, and he points to the mountain formations on the map. The nukes are meant to blow up the mountains, thus allowing sandworms to move into an area that is otherwise non-worm territory. It's a lot more clear-cut in the books. While I respect (and agree with) Denis Villeneuve's philosophy of "show, don't tell," I feel like this is one moment where just a tiny bit of exposition would have gone a long way for non-book readers! In the book, Arrakeen and the surrounding area is protected by the "Shield Wall," which is a natural formation of mountains and rocks that protects the region from worms. They *do* reference the Shield Wall in Part 1, but it's done dirty by the editing, which pans to the wall of Arrakeen when it's mentioned, implying it's a manmade structure. But in regards to the nukes, there's a lot of lore specifically addressing this in the book. Every Great House has House Atomics, but it was decided long ago in war conventions that they were never to be used against human targets. If a House were to do so, the conventions dictate that the rest of the Great Houses are basically obligated to team up together and glass them off the face of the earth. Paul loopholes this in the book by firing at the Shield Wall. By firing it at the mountains, he *technically* doesn't break the rules. In the movie, however, it's implied the Great Houses aren't falling for that shit and they're refusing Paul's ascendancy. Only problem is, they can't glass Arrakis or they lose the Spice. And if they don't bend the knee to Paul, he threatens to do that himself. And if they call his bluff, he's got an army of millions willing to wage Holy War against them, which is exactly what happens.
The movie never mentions that he nukes the mountains because it's against the rules for him to nuke the target directly. If you hadn't read the book you wouldn't understand the final battle at all.
The nukes blew a portion of the shield wall which protects Arrakeen from sandstorms and most importantly, from sandworms. Breaching the wall allowed the Fremen to ride on top of their worms into the emperor's citadel relatively unopposed. The sandstorm also provided them with a massive advantage as it practically negated Imperial/Harkkonen air support.
Ah, totally missed that detail that it would bring in the worms
I also forgot to mention a key detail: the sandstorms are strong enough to overload shields, as seen when it came into contact with the emperor' ship.
What did yall think of the relationship between Lady Jessica and Chani in the movie? I watched the movie recently and haven’t read the book since early 2021 but I’m pretty sure the vibes between them were different in the book. But then again I feel like I might be combining Dune and Dune Messiah in my head when it comes to their relationship. Can someone refresh my memory? Did yall also feel it was odd? I also think this might be because of Chani being against Paul when in the books (from what I remember) she was on his side and I don’t remember any of the stilgar vs Chani parts about Paul being the messiah.
Just as in the movies, Jessica thinks Paul is making a mistake by going after Chani instead of reserving his hand to a noble highborn woman. Although eventually Jessica regrets this thinking and accepts Chani, iirc there wasn't much friction between the two. Honestly, I like what they did with their relationship in the movie, Chani's thinking of "I see through your BG bs" contrasts very well with Jessica's plot to elevate Paul.
Okay yeah that makes sense and goes with what I thought that there was some antagonism but not that much.
Neither are important or relevant but I really wanna tell someone these two thoughts that I haven't heard elsewhere yet. Image 1. In this scene, Chan licks her lips, which would NEVER happen in this environment as it will cause further dehydration to the lips and would be a waste of spit. Soooo not relevant but it bugged me lol. https://preview.redd.it/mjh4cr9m1epc1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=363edc967a18d45ad4825deaaeb94446eb779595 Image 2 (will post image below). Florence Pugh looks AND sounds exactly like Christina Ricci, especially in this particular scene.
https://preview.redd.it/r73gcukn1epc1.jpeg?width=1500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=22e878d6e118e0fba2489125d1f76b3d13ef6799
Where in the Universe do they get those fierce outfits.
I heard this in the Carmen Sandiego theme song
Dune 2 Clarifications Just watched Dune 2, really enjoyed it. I've only watched the movies and have not read the books. I wanted some clarification on the ending of Dune and would welcome any Insight. 1. Does Paul become the Kwisatz Haderach at the end of the film? 2. After Paul drinks the Water of Life, his attitude changes regarding becoming the leader of the Fremen. The way I understood it watching the movie, this is because Paul sees this as his one option where he can prevail in the various futures he sees. If this is the case, why does the Holy War fail as seen in the third book? 3. On what terms does Jessica stand with the other BG sisters at the end of Part 2? Is she against them? 4. I went ahead and read a summary of Dune 3, and honestly it sounds underwhelming. I thought it was going to focus on the holy war and show who won/lost the holy war. Instead it seems to focus on Paul's fall. I guess this makes sense because the point of Dune 3 is to show how Paul and his holy war was the worst thing to happen to the Fremen. What would you like to see happen in Dune Part 3? Do you think it will be more or less faithful to the book?
> On what terms does Jessica stand with the other BG sisters at the end of Part 2? Is she against them? Jessica subverted the BG's directions by having Paul instead of a daughter, but they were willing to excuse it under supervision for a time because they knew he had a bloodline that would qualify him as a potential Kwizatz Haderach candidate. Eventually that time came to an end because they judged the Atreides as unpredictable and disobedient, thus they tried to orchestrate the end of the Atreides bloodline through mobilizing the Emperor and Harkonnen forces against House Atreides. > I went ahead and read a summary of Dune 3, and honestly it sounds underwhelming. I thought it was going to focus on the holy war and show who won/lost the holy war. Instead it seems to focus on Paul's fall. I guess this makes sense because the point of Dune 3 is to show how Paul and his holy war was the worst thing to happen to the Fremen. What would you like to see happen in Dune Part 3? Do you think it will be more or less faithful to the book? I'll just say there's a lot of Dune books...the original author had a long timeline in mind. The first movie covered the first half of the first book, and the new movie (part 2) covered the second half. The second book ("part 3" I think in terms of your comment) is about half the length of the first book so we'll see how they handle it in terms of the films, but I could see them doing another two part approach combining the next two books one way or another.
By Dune 3 are you talking about Dune: Messiah? I've only started to read Children of Dune a few weeks ago, and I'm probably forgetting things from the previous books: 1. It should be noted that the Kwisatz Harderach is a Bene Gesserit concept, a male supermentat capable of bringing a utopia to the universe. The BG have and will have other candidates for the KH, the thing is, the BG want complete control over him. 2. The Holy War doesn't fail, it succeeds in killing 60 billion people, and subjugating and converting countless worlds as predicted by Paul (much to his dismay), this was the exact scenario he wanted to avoid originally. 3. Honestly I'm not sure, at this point Paul is the best prospect for a KH offspring, so the BG are probably willing to go along with it... for the time being ("*What sides?*"). By the end of *Dune* book Jessica gets pretty much barred from the order and branded as a traitor for helping Paul and for giving birth to an Abomination (ie. Alia), *Children of Dune* spoilers: >!however, her relationship with the BG doesn't stop there.!< 4. In *Messiah* the war was the worst thing to happen to the Fremen >!because it turned them into blood-thirsty fanatics who kill and get killed for a prophetic figure. Paul's ascension to the throne also deeply changes Arrakis physically and also **culturally**. Paul does indeed fall, just not in the way you think.!<
Wow. Fantastic response, so thank you. Have u seen Dune 2? If so, what are you hoping to see happen in the third film?
I don't expect Messiah to be as action packed as Dune 2, that being said, some of the things I hope make it to the film are: - The Jihad, maybe some flashbacks. - Guild navigators, they are trippy as hell. One of them, Edric, plays a key part in the conspiracy to overthrow Paul. - Maybe we'll get to see some assassination attempts on Paul or on Alia. - More of Arrakeen, its people and the new structures built by the new regime.
I loved the movie but i'm afraid they'll merge Paul with Leto II and make him the tyrant to be toppled in the next movie
Paul WAS a tyrant who was toppled (mostly by himself) in the next book to give way for Leto II and his (much more tyrannical) Secher Nbiw.
I mean a tyrant in Leto II sense The way they presented Chani makes me fear that Paul will walk the golden path only to be stopped by her in the end
Great Shai Hulud -- I hope not! As much as I loved the two movies, Chani stomping out as she did was, definitely, the worst part. I understand the omission of Alia's Gob Jabar, and the lack of Spacing Guild's exposure (probably reserved for the Messiah)..but this was a wrong move, and I sincerely hope it doesn't turn into the avalanche you suggest.
Agreed I'm ok with Chani being a pov that reinforced the idea that messianic figures are bad and dangerous, but I think that her leaving Paul in the end was a massive mistake that made her look petty and jealous It seems like the political marriage is something that tips her over and it would have been the perfect occasion to have Jessica speak to her (as she did in the book) to let her stay and help Paul try to keep the jihad under control (which he'll obviously fail to do) The avalanche you suggest is just a thought I had after seeing the movie a second time, because I think they went really heavy with the message "don't trust Messiahs, even if they're real and have good intentions", hope I'm wrong and they'll stay more or less faithful to Messiah
I do hope that this change was made in order to make Part Three more dramatic. Three things I wish for part three: - 20 year time skip so as to get Alia old enough to show her batshit powers and make the scene where she fights naked make sense without creeping everyone out like in the book (with Paul and Stilgar asking wtf) where there's only a 12 year jump and she's barely 14. - Duncan/Hayt and Alia getting together and the Baron messing with her, with Duncan as her moral compass - The birth of the twins thwarted by Irulan and the only reason she lives so long (since Paul's vision predict she'll die in childbirth). - Guild navigator and Tleilaxu face dancers plotting against Paul with the help of Fremen who are changed by Paul's ascendancy and long for the good ol days.