Yeah. Villeneuve's Dune can only dream of being on par with Lynch's. I mean, not a single cat was milked in Dune: Part Two.In fairness not many can match up to this
Film Dune
- Thread starter duffer
- Start date
"I have nipples, Muad'Dib, could you milk me?"
Looks heavily like the baldies from Prometheus there (a less happy imax experience).New one made me think of a bald Haaland
Is it me, or is it fairly obviously that it's a bald cap? It adds some additional volume to an already formidable noggin.New one made me think of a bald Haaland
Looks like Matt Smith .
Actually also a bit of an Iain Dowie aura.
Yep, he's in BikeRiderd with Tom Hardy as well (not to mention Masters of the Air) and I'm sure i saw his name mentioned in the Heat 2 thread - i think he there's a clip of him doing some gun training. So yeah, he's become very high profile in a very short space since Elvis.
Personal favorite, but I was blown away by Dredd (2012) on the big screen.
@Andy_Cole
You make me sad by not mentioning Gladiator's opening battle.
You make me sad by not mentioning Gladiator's opening battle.
I's actually my all time favourite movie. I did think about Gladiator when making the list. I guess because it was an opening scene rather than a climax I didn't include!
Typical man, always thinking about the climax.
Good man. All is forgiven.
Braveheart is a decent shout too but in some ways isn't quite as visceral especially with the torture scenes after that doing that a lot more.
Speaking of Mel Gibson: remember the cannonball bouncing off the battlefield and taking a dude's head right off in The Patriot?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Do you interpret Paul’s actions in the final act as being driven by
a realization of the inevitability of a Holy War after consuming the Water of Life, resulting in a sense of clarity and grudging acceptance of his fate? Or rather a thirst for revenge, and even power? Or a combination of both?
Also, how aligned are Paul’s actions in the final act with the plans and wishes of 1) Lady Jessica and 2) the rest of the Bene Gesserit?
Also, how aligned are Paul’s actions in the final act with the plans and wishes of 1) Lady Jessica and 2) the rest of the Bene Gesserit?
Yeah it's really good - didn't love it as much as the first (which for me moves at a much better pace) - but yeah really enjoyed it. The spectacle / world building / visuals are all just on another level.
It's a weird one, because I definitely felt the run-time at parts, yet the last 30 minutes felt a bit rushed? Maybe it's 'cos I needed a piss half way through though.
One issue...
It's a weird one, because I definitely felt the run-time at parts, yet the last 30 minutes felt a bit rushed? Maybe it's 'cos I needed a piss half way through though.
One issue...
The reveal that Paul was the Baron's grandson felt a bit pointless/tacked on? Like, you take that out of the film and literally nothing changes apart from him not being able to growl "grandfather" and "cousin" twice. Maybe it's something that'll have a bigger impact in part three?
I think it's also partly the reveal that he has been part of the Bene Gesserit breeding program from the start (as has Jessica). I'm not sure if that was revealed earlier in the series or really elaborated on that much. But the point is that Lady Jessica was supposed to have a daughter that would marry Feyd-Rautha and their child would be the Kwisatz Haderach. But Jessica defied her order and had a son instead, which throws the plan into turmoil.
I agree it did seem a bit pointless in the movie though, but there is more lore around it in the book.
I agree it did seem a bit pointless in the movie though, but there is more lore around it in the book.
Re: spoilers. It becomes a bigger part of the story in the third book Children of Dune as it impacts the relationship between Paul's children and Alia (technically the granddaughter of Baron Harkonnen through Jessica's bloodline).
Will they ever get to the point where it matters? No idea, which is perhaps why it was glossed over in this one.
Got round to watching this last night.
Was better than the first, but there's a few things that didn't make sense (or went over my head).
Was better than the first, but there's a few things that didn't make sense (or went over my head).
1) Him marrying Florence Pugh's character literally made no sense given the other houses didn't recognise his authority. Why not just keep her as a slave / prisoner or whatever, wage war on the other houses and take Zendaya as your wife? If the marriage to Pugh was to gain some legitimacy to the throne, then yea, have at it.
2) The neo-Nazi looking cousin made little sense. They built him up as some big bad, and his whole arc lasted around 30 mins. Kill some slaves in a gladiator pit, then die one on one to Chalamet's character.
3) They found the atomic warheads - why didn't they just drop them on the enemy instead of creating a sandstorm with it? They could have done that and kept the emperor alive surely?
4) It was generally well acted, but I found it difficult to find Chalamet as some intimidating leader. I just don't think he had the gravitas required...but maybe I'm being picky.
5) As a visual spectacle, I really enjoyed it. It didn't seem like a CGI fest which is a job well done.
2) The neo-Nazi looking cousin made little sense. They built him up as some big bad, and his whole arc lasted around 30 mins. Kill some slaves in a gladiator pit, then die one on one to Chalamet's character.
3) They found the atomic warheads - why didn't they just drop them on the enemy instead of creating a sandstorm with it? They could have done that and kept the emperor alive surely?
4) It was generally well acted, but I found it difficult to find Chalamet as some intimidating leader. I just don't think he had the gravitas required...but maybe I'm being picky.
5) As a visual spectacle, I really enjoyed it. It didn't seem like a CGI fest which is a job well done.
1) She's hot though? Hot wife and hot concubine?
2) Agree on this point. Specifically, it was strange that once he arrived they immediately knew where the Fremen base was and bombed the shit out of it. Like, why couldn't Rabban have done this? Wasn't explained.
3) I guess they didn't want to fully destroy the city?
2) Agree on this point. Specifically, it was strange that once he arrived they immediately knew where the Fremen base was and bombed the shit out of it. Like, why couldn't Rabban have done this? Wasn't explained.
3) I guess they didn't want to fully destroy the city?
@The Corinthian Re: 3. Paul wants to save Dune not destroy it. There's the subtext of ecological preserve which is the Fremen's big influence and reason why Paul becomes invested in understanding how to use nature to his advantage. I read the atomic warhead scene as showing the difference between what the Atreides were like before Paul came in and cared about the fate of Arrakis. They come in handy later on but not on Arrakis specifically 
Am I the only one who only realised after that the Florence Pugh and the Lea Seydoux character were different people?
Oh yea, that's a great point (your number 2). To be honest, they could have given all of that character's scenes to Rabban and it wouldn't have made a difference plot wise. It may be they just wanted to give Gantry (is that his name? Josh Brolin's character?) an epic moment at the end and could only use Rabban.
Ah that makes sense, thanks!@The Corinthian Re: 3. Paul wants to save Dune not destroy it. There's the subtext of ecological preserve which is the Fremen's big influence and reason why Paul becomes invested in understanding how to use nature to his advantage. I read the atomic warhead scene as showing the difference between what the Atreides were like before Paul came in and cared about the fate of Arrakis. They come in handy later on but not on Arrakis specifically
Gurney
And yeah, they have history in the books. Rabban killed his family and kept him as a slave, if I remember right.
The Dune novel has an issue with the villains coming across as somewhat ineffective since they don't really achieve anything after taking over Arrakis, especially the Harkonnens. That's why Feyd seems useless. This is exacerbated in a two-part adaptation since they chose not to introduce him in part 1.
I guess they gave him the somewhat illogical scene of attacking the Sietch so he'd do something.
It's an issue in all the adaptations. At least here they did the sensible change of having
I guess they gave him the somewhat illogical scene of attacking the Sietch so he'd do something.
It's an issue in all the adaptations. At least here they did the sensible change of having
Paul kill the Baron, even if he was already struggling.
Last edited:
No, I only realised after watching some youtube reviews and they were talking about two different people.
They share a scene (iirc).
Do all white women look the same to you? Racism and misogyny!!
Thanks both!
Seems like with these films Denis Villeneuve didn't want to introduce chracters until they becom eintegral to the story - which I think is a good approach when splitting the two films - but I do wonder if Feyd would have felt like a bigger part of the story/more of a threat if the film actually started with him and his story, so you're aware of him right away as a looming threat for Paul
It's been a while since I read the book so I may be misremembering it, but wasn't a poisoned blade a key part of the fight between Paul and feyd?
Yes, it's what's Feyd has, it's an important plot point in their fight.
Ah, maybe Paul drops dead right after the credits roll then, RIP Messiah.
Was a good watch. Felt a bit too rushed at times but was such a cinematic experience.
Paul seemed to go from being boy to Messiah a bit too fast. And then it ended. Loved the use of the voice at that Old hag, would have been better to have established a bit more just how deadly he is.
Paul seemed to go from being boy to Messiah a bit too fast. And then it ended. Loved the use of the voice at that Old hag, would have been better to have established a bit more just how deadly he is.
Nope. As part of is messiah qualities, he actually manages to break down the toxin into harmless molecules when he's stabbed and it enters his body.
Also, it's crazy how much Star Wars has borrowed from this universe (and now much it itself has borrowed from Islamic mythology). I wonder if this would be considered a bigger franchise if they had released the first movie before the first Star Wars.
For any book readers - how different is the movie from the book? Is the book worth reading?
For any book readers - how different is the movie from the book? Is the book worth reading?
Paul's holy war is literally referred to as a jihad throughout the books.
Definitely worth a read, the first two at least. Haven't started the third yet myself.
I actually reread the first two books recently (after 30 years or so), but haven't seen the second film yet. Anyway, yes, definitely worth reading. There's a lot of thought in there and they're interesting on quite a few levels (not eye-opening or anything like that, just interesting), beyond the basic narrative - which is good as well.
Some would say "borrowed", but it's pretty close to "stole" in my opinion. The voice vs. the force, there is a desert planet (where they farm moisture), there is an evil emperor, they fight with swords, etc. It's all a bit too close for comfort.
I'm finishing the first book these days, and it's quite enjoyable. It's much less action packed than the movies, and much more about dialogue, intrigue, scheming, and especially the inner thoughts of the characters. One small interesting structural thing is that each chapter begins with a short text from a fictional work by the Princess Irulan, which actually gives away some of the plot before it happens. For example, you will hear about how Yueh will betray the Atreides way before it actually happens, but of course you don't get all the details, but just how it is perceived by history.