- Joined
- Jan 14, 2010
- Messages
- 31,028
- Supports
- Everton
The two movies end where the first book ends basically. Essentially what RiP says is correct, it's about Paul learning and accepting his position in the world.
Some of this is an issue with the source material, it's always been a bit anticlimactic because the Harkonnens get dispatched somewhat easily and then the Emperor is in and out of the picture quickly. This is probably magnified in this version since Feyd is not in the first movie. So basically he gets a long introduction, doesn't do much afterwards, and then dies.Resolved? A huge war was starting and the woman he would "love forever" had been rejected and was buggering of to do something or other. Seemed far from resolved to me. Both of us looked at each other a bit stunned at the end. "Was that it" was my wife's response. So little really happened in terms of plot and it took so long to get there. I didn't hate it at all but what a missed opportunity IMO.
I think that actually makes it work though. The movie ends with Paul gaining absolute power and setting in motion a freightful Fremen assault on the galaxy, while Chani leaves him. That's what he foresaw and what he tried to avoid by refusing to travel south. In that sense, it's a drama in which Paul fights the pressure of those around him that want him to become God Emperor of Dune because he knows it won't be pretty - but eventually succumbs and indeed loses himself in the process. That's a narrative arch that can satisfactorily end exactly where it does. (And in which the final battle is a trifling detail that can go only one way, and therefore cannot reasonably be stretched out into some epic cinematic happening.)The movie feels a bit more open because the whole 'Chani leaves' thing is a Villeneuve invention.
Paul also doesn’t have a problem with sand.I thought it resolved pretty well - Paul's journey through the 2 films seems to be basically what Anakin was supposed to do through the prequels, except that Paul's motivations and decisions make a lot more sense.
For the film itself, I think I preferred the first, remember it feeling more spectacular, but that could be because it was my first post-covid theater movie.
Paul also doesn’t have a problem with sand.
A quick glance at the timelines suggests this is around the time of the end of the Butlerian Jihad and before the Guild system, so there's good scope for some machinations and intrigue. Depends on the writing is probably the copout answer, if they just go down the route of pointing at familiar names and shouting "like from Dune!" at the viewer then it won't be very good. Bit disappointing the design all looks so similar to a time 10,000 years hence.I'm interested to see how this does. I know it had some issues in production and visually its seems to be very much influenced by the recent two films.
But does this element of the Dune world interest people ?