Dune: deuxième partie

Like the first part, the second part is visually stunning, though having read the book twice, I regret to say that unlike the David Lynch version from the eighties, De Villeneuve almost deliberately destresses the mystical/mythical core of the story. This makes for an impressive viewing that somehow left me unsatisfied. In De Villeneuve's hands the story becomes one of political grandstanding which is but part of what the book is about, both in relation to the hidden ways of the Fremen and the nature and mission of Paul and his mother. For example, in the second part those scenes where Paul Atreides becomes the Kwizatz Haderach are rather weak and not very convincing.

Having left this essence out of the movies, they become a bit of an emptied out visual experience. A kind of secular, profane Dune. Still nice, but also a bit disappointing.

Denis Villeneuve's DUNE: PART TWO is a review-proof film. Either you watched - and loved - the first part, in which case you have already gone out and seen it. Or...you didn't like the first part (or didn't watch it), in which case you are not going to the Cineplex to check out the sequel.

If you ARE going to see this film, the BankofMarquis strongly recommends you see it in theaters with the best sound and largest screen possible...for 2 reasons.

Reason 1: This film is visually and audibly stunning. It is a feast for the eyes and ears. Director Villeneuve (and all involved in the production, costume, sound and Fx design) have topped the very high bar they set for themselves with the first Dune and expect this film to rake in ALL of these types of awards come next Oscars' season. They visually (and audibly) credibly present new worlds in such a way that you are sure that the movie was filmed on location when (in fact) it is all pretty much green sky. An amazing technical achievement

Reason 2: It's a good thing that this film is visually and audibly stunning, because the storyline itself, is rather boring and somewhat complex. This is the fault of the source novel as Dune (and it's sequels) are just as interested in the politics and back room dealings of how you turn a hero into a Messiah (with a ton of backstory and plot development thought by the characters - never a good way to present a movie). So you will want to watch this in a theater so you can keep focused on the plot (as opposed to at home where you will be tempted to pick up your phone, pet the dog, go make a sandwich etc.) and not miss some of the intricacies.

Caught between Reason 1 and Reason 2 are a laundry list of performers and performances that are struggling to match the technical achievements of Dune: Part Two while acting against a green screen with some long, boring speeches and some very clunky dialogue.

Timothee Chalamet, Zendaya, Rebecca Ferguson and Charlotte Rampling all return from the first part and they are "just fine", not really elevating things, but not bringing them down either. They gamely bring their best to a rather difficult and thankless job.

Thank goodness Javier Bardem and Josh Brolin are back as their characters bring some life and energy to the proceedings while Florence Pugh, Dave Bautista, Lea Seydoux, Stellan Skarsgard and (especially) Christopher Walken (!) are wasted in their roles, really being more of a piece of furniture to move around rather than anything that represents an interesting character.

Only Austin Butler's Feyd-Rautha brings new excitement to the 2nd half of this 2 hour and 40 minute epic and, by that point in this film, it is much needed.

Come to DUNE: PART TWO for the visual and sound achievements and stay for...the visual and sound achievements - and the setup to the inevitable sequel.

Letter Grade: B

7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)

If you liked or loved the first one, the same will apply for this one. Personally, I loved this one even more and I think general audiences will as well. So I hope it does well at the box office because I need Dune Messiah now. This is everything I love about going to the movies. Also, Hans Zimmer.

For book readers, I'd say this one takes more liberties than the first, but they were changes I liked, some for the better even. For the most part, it still hits the main beats from the book with a few things altered. The biggest change being no time jump. Therefore, a certain character doesn't fully appear in the movie contrary to the book. Though, they still use the character in a different way that I liked personally.

I know it's early in the year, but you can lock some Oscar nominations for this movie: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Score, Best Sound, Best Visual Effects, Best Costume, Best Production Design, Best Makeup, and hopefully Rebecca Ferguson this time for Best Supporting Actress. I guess that's pretty much every category now that I've typed it out lol.

I saw Dune 2 on an XD screen and sound system. Visually, Dune 2 was jaw dropping. The sound was intense, and at times, too loud and droning. If you are interested in seeing this movie, it is worth seeing on a big screen.

Though I was fully engaged for its 2 hour and 46 minute run time, I would not call Dune 2 a masterpiece. Most characters acted emotionally flat. I also felt the romance between Paul and Chani was not convincing. When the story was reaching its climax, I did not care about the characters. I also think the movie should have spent a little time on setup about the Fremen. I get that they are oppressed by the Harkonnen, but their sacrifices and lost freedom should be shown to the viewer so we understand the emotional motivation to do a full assault on the Harkonnen.

Austin Butler was so intense in the movie. It illustrates his acting range. I hope he is recognized for his performance.

And here are some little nit-picky criticisms. They don't address how the Fremen eat. In terms of world building, these sort of details are necessary to make the world believable. I'm not convinced humans could survive on Arrakis. There is no way you could grow crops and raise animals. Did they eat synthetic food? The planet also couldn't sustain gigantic worms. These huge beasts would have to consume millions of calories a day, which is not available. Showing the details of a sustainable life on such a dry planet would help with believability. And the voice control thing done by the Bene Gesserit is sort of dumb. I know this is from the book, but that part of the book doesn't hold up over time.

I did enjoy the movie, but I saying it's as good as Dark Knight will be a huge overstatement.

Enough good things have already been said about this movie, so I'll just point out the negatives:

1. All viallians feel quite weak, bland, and never seem to pose any real threat. Bautista's character is a joke, Baron isn't threatening, and the new villian (being called as good as joker by some people) also feels very generic. The *new abilities* that Paul gets also feel too convenient and easy to get.

2. Characters change a lot instantly, Jessica suddenly becomes this completely different character, and same goes with Paul.

3. I can see how it may have to be rushed in the movie format, but the pacing could've been better.

4. Paul is the prophesied prophet, and... That just happens with no surprises etc. In some ways, I think that was for the better, as it avoids the overdone struggling hero cliche, but I was prepared to feel tense for Paul, but never really felt that there was a reason to feel tense.

Overall, it's a solid 8/10, it is a technical masterpiece if you look at cinematography etc., but as a movie overall, it's just another 'good watch' which is well worth its time, and that's completely fine.