Dune - part 2 (Film)

[Rolta]

6 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

This is the wrongest wrong thing I’ve ever read in the history of wrongness

I'm developing a theory that if you know about the books and the overall story then this 3 hour Hans Zimmer music video is enjoyable. If you don't then it just feels like hollow nothingness. 

No argument could be made that the characters are well developed. There's a scene where Zendaya and Rebecca Ferguson have an argument. It lasts about a minute, they discuss the story's central theme, and neither of them have spoken or had a scene together at all, or at best to any significant or memorable degree. 99% of the sequences in the whole film last about two minutes max. It's like a big summary/montage of an actual plot. Character development in these films has been removed entirely because there's way too much to fit in. 

For me it started with promise but never got engaging once. 

 

[Villan_of_oz]

2 hours ago, Rolta said:

I'm developing a theory that if you know about the books and the overall story then this 3 hour Hans Zimmer music video is enjoyable. If you don't then it just feels like hollow nothingness. 

No argument could be made that the characters are well developed. There's a scene where Zendaya and Rebecca Ferguson have an argument. It lasts about a minute, they discuss the story's central theme, and neither of them have spoken or had a scene together at all, or at best to any significant or memorable degree. 99% of the sequences in the whole film last about two minutes max. It's like a big summary/montage of an actual plot. Character development in these films has been removed entirely because there's way too much to fit in. 

For me it started with promise but never got engaging once. 

 

Nonsense.

[Designer1]

Going to see it for a second time today - absolutely stunning piece of work from Villeneuve.

[theunderstudy]

All of the major players in this film are portrayed incredibly and I've seen plenty of people saying this is a star-making role for Austin Butler (can't disagree) but Chalamet's performance is absolutely incredible in this and has stuck with me. You buy his first half performance and reluctance to be a messiah and then the shift he undertakes makes sense

Spoiler

Starting with his self-doubt due to not foreseeing the Harkonnen assault on the Sietch and then needing to go south and drink the Water of Life and how that changes him into how he is in the second half culminating in his power grab from the Emperor by taking Irulan for a bride. It's incredibly well done. 

 

The scene where he fully buys into being the messiah in the South.... absolutely incredible.

 

[Stevo985]

4 hours ago, Rolta said:

I'm developing a theory that if you know about the books and the overall story then this 3 hour Hans Zimmer music video is enjoyable. If you don't then it just feels like hollow nothingness. 

No argument could be made that the characters are well developed. There's a scene where Zendaya and Rebecca Ferguson have an argument. It lasts about a minute, they discuss the story's central theme, and neither of them have spoken or had a scene together at all, or at best to any significant or memorable degree. 99% of the sequences in the whole film last about two minutes max. It's like a big summary/montage of an actual plot. Character development in these films has been removed entirely because there's way too much to fit in. 

For me it started with promise but never got engaging once. 

 

I’ve not read the books but thought the first film was absolutely spectacular. It was **** brilliant

[Anthony]

Is this an OK place to ask about Zendaya? In the first film I felt she was the weakest actor, but then, the character didn't have much to do. In part 2 she has much more screen time, but to me, again, she's the weakest on screen presence. Admittedly it would be hard to shine amongst so many great performances, but I feel she's competent at best, but mainly she's just wooden. She has angry face and smiling face, that's kind of it. Why is she so revered? I saw Spiderman No Way Home and she was OK I guess. What has she been in where she shows more range? Any suggestions, because I'm just not getting it.

[Designer1]

7 minutes ago, Anthony said:

Is this an OK place to ask about Zendaya? In the first film I felt she was the weakest actor, but then, the character didn't have much to do. In part 2 she has much more screen time, but to me, again, she's the weakest on screen presence. Admittedly it would be hard to shine amongst so many great performances, but I feel she's competent at best, but mainly she's just wooden. She has angry face and smiling face, that's kind of it. Why is she so revered? I saw Spiderman No Way Home and she was OK I guess. What has she been in where she shows more range? Any suggestions, because I'm just not getting it.

Agree she didn't have much to do in the part 1 so very difficult to judge her in that but I thought she was good in part 2 tbh.

Her best performance is in Malcolm and Marie where she really showed her range. 

I thought the most 'phoned in' performance in part 2 was Chris Walken - I felt like he'd been beamed in from a different film (and I bloody love him!)

Edited March 4 by Designer1

[Rolta]

3 hours ago, Villan_of_oz said:

Nonsense.

I'm getting the impression this film is incredibly Marmite. Everyone I went with was bored to tears. And I am not someone limited to easy popcorn films—I consider myself as someone with a pretty broad taste and capable of extreme film nerdery. From an actual 'dramatisation' point of view I found it to be all spectacle and no soul. And maybe I said it before, but this is exactly what happens when there's too much plot to cram in.

[MaVilla]

28 minutes ago, Rolta said:

I'm getting the impression this film is incredibly Marmite. Everyone I went with was bored to tears. And I am not someone limited to easy popcorn films—I consider myself as someone with a pretty broad taste and capable of extreme film nerdery. From an actual 'dramatisation' point of view I found it to be all spectacle and no soul. And maybe I said it before, but this is exactly what happens when there's too much plot to cram in.

I agree that Dune itself tends to be marmite, so im not entirely surprised the films are the same.

Dune is just that type of book, that most people love it or hate it, or just cant read it, and there is a smaller numbers of "meh" in the middle.

Personally i love it, but if you dont, you dont, each to their own.

I think the excitement for many people who do love it, is hightened due to the fact that the book is 60 ish years old, wow.....just saying that sounds weird, anyway, my point is, that so many people who love the books, have been waiting so long for a brilliant adaptation of the book(s), that when it does happen, the feeling is that much more higntened, and people want to talk about it, i guess.

There was the 80s Dune film, but tbh it was comically bad, so this Dune feels like a true watershed moment for many who love the series, to finally see their love of the books, translated to a brilliant film (in their opinion), by a brilliant director.

ie: personally i have been waiting nearly 30 years for someone to make a worthy film adaptation of the books, some may have been waiting longer.

On a side note, the only tv series/film that i thought was actually any good, was the Children of Dune mini series starring James McAvoy, suffice to say, its been a long wait for many, so i can see why its such a big thing for some.

[Designer1]

2 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

I’ve not read the books but thought the first film was absolutely spectacular. It was **** brilliant

Same here. Never got around to the books (been meaning to for years) but both of the DV movies have been outstanding.

[mjmooney]

1 hour ago, MaVilla said:

There was the 80s Dune film, but tbh it was comically bad 

Oh god, yeah. Terrible film. I walked out of that one. 

[MaVilla]

2 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

I’ve not read the books but thought the first film was absolutely spectacular. It was **** brilliant

what im about to say is clearly untrue, but from the perspective of someone who has read Dune probably 10+ times, and the others in the series numerous times, i cant imagine how someone who hasnt read the books could actually "get" Dune in just 2 movies.

Now, from the amount of people who loved the 2 Dune movies, and havent read the books, my belief is clearly not true, but maybe there is some truth in it, in the sense that the books give much more detail and nuance, that underpin the whole story, like a deeper understanding etc,  but if you dont know it in advance, i guess you just dont, and take the film on face value, and its still superb i guess?

anyways, glad you liked it.

 

[theunderstudy]

12 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

what im about to say is clearly untrue, but from the perspective of someone who has read Dune probably 10+ times, and the others in the series numerous times, i cant imagine how someone who hasnt read the books could actually "get" Dune in just 2 movies.

Now, from the amount of people who loved the 2 Dune movies, and havent read the books, my belief is clearly not true, but maybe there is some truth in it, in the sense that the books give much more detail and nuance, that underpin the whole story, like a deeper understanding etc,  but if you dont know it in advance, i guess you just dont, and take the film on face value, and its still superb i guess?

anyways, glad you liked it.

 

You could say the same about Lord of the Rings or Game of Thrones though.  You can't bring everything from the books to the screen as there's always so much nuance and world-building you do in literature that you can write into a book and first person opinions from the thoughts of POV characters you can't display as well on screen without clunky exposition and there's a lot of questions even Villeneuves films that the book answers.... but I think there's enough context in the films to get the central premise across. In my opinion. Others may not share it or feel its been given shorter shrift than possible. Some might argue it could have been 3 films to allow for more buildup to the final part from the middle of the story.

[Keyblade]

I wouldn't actually know, but I felt that the movie did a really good job of getting across the central themes to people who aren't familiar with the books. I also like that it had more of a "show, don't tell" approach but then again I would like that wouldn't I? It's one of my pet peeves of modern movies/blockbusters, where there's too much exposition and the viewer is taken to be some kind of fool.

Also, I think Zendaya was the weak link of the movie as well. It's not even necessarily her acting per se, as I think she does a great job of conveying emotion with her face but it's when she starts speaking that everything falls apart. All the Fremen who can even speak English have an accent, except for her. For some reason she has a perfect American accent, and there's no real explanation for it. It's like they dropped MJ from Spiderman into this and put her into a stillsuit, with her sarcasm and everything. It's really jarring. It's one of my few complaints.

[stewiek2]

Chalamet did right. I'd choose Florence Pugh over Zendeya every day of the week as well.

[Keyblade]

59 minutes ago, stewiek2 said:

Chalamet did right. I'd choose Florence Pugh over Zendeya every day of the week as well.

She'd have been a bad choice too imo. Even as Princess Irulan, she seemed off. Maybe I'm biased towards American accents, but Chalemet seems to be the only one to pull it off and still feeling like Paul. From an appearance perspective I think Zendaya is probably the ideal choice to play Chani, and maybe Villaneuve was leaning to hard into that, to keep visual cohesiveness. 

[Rolta]

2 hours ago, Keyblade said:

I wouldn't actually know, but I felt that the movie did a really good job of getting across the central themes to people who aren't familiar with the books. I also like that it had more of a "show, don't tell" approach but then again I would like that wouldn't I? It's one of my pet peeves of modern movies/blockbusters, where there's too much exposition and the viewer is taken to be some kind of fool.

Also, I think Zendaya was the weak link of the movie as well. It's not even necessarily her acting per se, as I think she does a great job of conveying emotion with her face but it's when she starts speaking that everything falls apart. All the Fremen who can even speak English have an accent, except for her. For some reason she has a perfect American accent, and there's no real explanation for it. It's like they dropped MJ from Spiderman into this and put her into a stillsuit, with her sarcasm and everything. It's really jarring. It's one of my few complaints.

I'd argue it didn't show over tell. It just didn't try to dramatise anything at all! Because it didn't have the space. People just say the plot then the scene ends. Onto the next one, then the next one. That's not good dramatic writing. 

For the record everyone I watched it with thought it was a massive drag too. 

[Keyblade]

6 minutes ago, Rolta said:

I'd argue it didn't show over tell. It just didn't try to dramatise anything at all! Because it didn't have the space. People just say the plot then the scene ends. Onto the next one, then the next one. That's not good dramatic writing. 

For the record everyone I watched it with thought it was a massive drag too. 

Quite hard to do with 2.5 hours, and a lot of material to portray. And also the book is kind of like this. It's not really dramatic until the very end (Messiah is even more like this, oh man I can imagine how boring people will find that movie if it ever comes out), but I think the climax was a good payoff and well worth it.

The majority of the book is watching the political machinations of the Baron (to be fair, something I felt the movie was sorely missing), and Paul slowly gaining power among the Fremen by convincing them (willingly or not) he's a Messiah until things come to a head at the end.

[MaVilla]

7 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Quite hard to do with 2.5 hours, and a lot of material to portray. And also the book is kind of like this. It's not really dramatic until the very end (Messiah is even more like this, oh man I can imagine how boring people will find that movie if it ever comes out), but I think the climax was a good payoff and well worth it.

The majority of the book is watching the political machinations of the Baron (to be fair, something I felt the movie was sorely missing), and Paul slowly gaining power among the Fremen by convincing them (willingly or not) he's a Messiah until things come to a head at the end.

i have heard a few people say the third film should be Messiah and CoD as one film.

Not sure how it would work as a timeline, due to the years between each, but both books are fairly small as stand alone books, compared to Dune itself.

Dunno, part of me really wants something like that, because i would love to see the series up to and including CoD on film, but eh...im sure Villeneuve could make messiah an entire movie.

i get the impression that Villeneuve wanted to do up to messiah only, so we prob wont get to see CoD, which for me is a missed opportunity, because i loved CoD, and i thought it really brought Dune and Messiah in to a nice conclusion, well, not conclusion, but i feel like Dune, Messiah and CoD is one ark, with GEoD kind of a secondary ark but including CoD, i dunno, like overlapping arks.

ie: Dune, Messiah and CoD is one ark, then CoD and GEoD is like a second ark, but GEoD is also its own ark.....blimey lol.

Edited March 4 by MaVilla

[Keyblade]

50 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

i have heard a few people say the third film should be Messiah and CoD as one film.

Not sure how it would work as a timeline, due to the years between each, but both books are fairly small as stand alone books, compared to Dune itself.

Dunno, part of me really wants something like that, because i would love to see the series up to and including CoD on film, but eh...im sure Villeneuve could make messiah an entire movie.

i get the impression that Villeneuve wanted to do up to messiah only, so we prob wont get to see CoD, which for me is a missed opportunity, because i loved CoD, and i thought it really brought Dune and Messiah in to a nice conclusion, well, not conclusion, but i feel like Dune, Messiah and CoD is one ark, with GEoD kind of a secondary ark but including CoD, i dunno, like overlapping arks.

ie: Dune, Messiah and CoD is one ark, then CoD and GEoD is like a second ark, but GEoD is also its own ark.....blimey lol.

That would probably be a good idea. That's how the SyFy miniseries did it wasn't it? Children of Dune is probably the one book in the series that could successfully be translated to an action(ish) movie that the average movie-goer who has never read the series would find enjoyable. And then Messiah is quite literally the opposite of that  . Despite probably being my second favourite book in the series, I have to admit almost much nothing happens plot-wise for the entire book until right at the end. Its beauty lies in the struggle within Paul to come to grips with the fact that he's basically space-Hitler (I'm pretty sure there was even a quote where he told someone that there was this guy called Hitler in ancient times who put up rookie numbers compared to him  ). Doesn't exactly make for exciting viewing. But as a first act/arc of a movie it could work.

God Emperor would be hilarious to see on-screen. It's so outlandish to the uninitiated, that I don't think it'll ever be made and if it is it probably won't have the budget of the current movies.