- Joined
- Sep 21, 2012
- Messages
- 952
I still don't see why the supposed "more true to the original" adaptation, has made so many changes to the original.
Particularly with mentats, no one seems to care to present them in this (the first film), even when they are significant characters.
Though reading a small part of Dune, it was rather strange imo to see mentats dealing with extremely theoretical issues (such as how person x will react), instead of what you'd think a "human computer" would be dealing with (basically what the Spacing Guild deals with).
Typically in scifi (eg Philip Dick) you see Bene Gesserit types do that (as in psychic humans that read other people's minds), not some person who just thinks intricately. Besides, Piter's use of spice was apparently frowned upon, but the math-wizards of the Spacing Guild literally live on spice.
Particularly with mentats, no one seems to care to present them in this (the first film), even when they are significant characters.
Though reading a small part of Dune, it was rather strange imo to see mentats dealing with extremely theoretical issues (such as how person x will react), instead of what you'd think a "human computer" would be dealing with (basically what the Spacing Guild deals with).
Typically in scifi (eg Philip Dick) you see Bene Gesserit types do that (as in psychic humans that read other people's minds), not some person who just thinks intricately. Besides, Piter's use of spice was apparently frowned upon, but the math-wizards of the Spacing Guild literally live on spice.
Last edited:
Villeneuve is lying through his teeth when he claims that his movie isn't a copycat of the Lynch movie and "more true to the novel". Genderswapping Kynes is just one item on a list of things he got wrong.
Mentats are basically human computers. They're trained to take separate facts and put them together to figure out what is going on, both on a large scale, and on a smaller scale. They have some ability to predict what will happen if certain actions are taken or not taken. It's got nothing to do with mind-reading. They're not psychic. They don't read the minutiae of body-language like the Bene Gesserit are trained to do. They can't control their own body chemistry or nerves and muscles as the Bene Gesserit can. They can be highly-skilled warriors (not sure if there are any Ginaz-trained mentats until Duncan Idaho's first ghola was trained as a mentat in Dune Messiah).
One reason why Paul was able to come out on top is that Thufir Hawat was secretly training him to be a mentat, and Jessica was training him in Bene Gesserit skills. He had the benefit of Duncan Idaho's training at the Ginaz school. So between the mentat, Bene Gesserit, and warriors' training, he would have been well-equipped to take on whatever was thrown at him, in a situation where it was a normal type of war. His trainers and tutors didn't plan for the Fremen, though. Jessica realized that they had to take advantage of the legends planted generations earlier by the Bene Gesserit (the Missionaria Protectiva) to survive long enough to prove to the Fremen that it was in their best interests to keep her and Paul alive.
The BG don't actually read minds. They have an extensive spy network to gather facts, and when they put facts together with reading the minutiae of body language, voice tones, etc., it can give the illusion of mind reading. They're that good at it.
Mentats don't rely on melange. They use a different drug to help them do their computations. That's not to say that some of them don't use spice. Anyone in the Imperium who can afford it would likely use it, as it provides benefits to their health and longevity. They usually try to hide that use, though, as there is both a social stigma attached to it, and also it's a giveaway to your enemies if your enemies know you're wealthy enough to afford your daily dose of spice.
Moriarte
Immortal
- Joined
- May 10, 2012
- Messages
- 2,672
I went to cinema to see Dune (part two). I haven't been to cinema theatre for.. a decade. Villeneuve's Dune was the perfect excuse to indulge in something I used to do quite often in another life. I was treated with luxurious seats, very plush, retractable to the point of lying down, a glass of apple juice and a small salty popcorn. Not to dwell too long on the surroundings, I do have mixed feelings about the film. First of all, I haven't read the books. But I am familiar with the setting, partly from playing the game in the nineties, partly from reading some articles later. You won't hear me ranting that Villeneuve removed this or that character, changed someone gender, etc. I am simply unaware of most of these fine details.
What I am aware of, is that Dune is a scattered little film. I guess my main rant is that the pacing is off, the famous Villeneuve's pacing which he tries to copy, sometimes successfully, from cinema masters of old. (Kubrick, Kurosawa). There are pleiades of top Hollywood actors present in this film, way too many I would say. And each of them occupies a small niche, each plays small part, then vanishes, with narrative re-centering on Paul Atreides again. I fault Villeneuve for his ambition, which prompted him to include a dozen great stars and each star doesn't have the time to "open up" and make a print in viewer's mind, the movie rushes on and on in front of my eyes, striving to tell me as much of a story per second as it humanly can.
The obvious other part to this failure is the decision to make a film instead of mini-series or some such. I think that in order to reap maximum benefit from the master's work, to amplify it in the best way, one should try to stay as much within canvas of what is written originally, because that canvas is the original object of interest of viewers. Historically, this is well understood by some, while completely neglected by others. People voted Herbert into the hall of fame of sci-fi, because he was good with words. Use his words, use his pacing, that's why people love him. Villeneuve, or his superiors, decide to part ways with original pacing and to make a film instead of a longer format - the result - the pacing is off, brilliant actors don't have enough time to open up, show their talents, and we sort of waltz past too many events with director trying to tell us as much as possible within a very limited movie format. Feels like watching a comic book unfold. On top of that, the 12 Euro theatre seats I was praising above made me lose consciousness a couple of times for a minute or two - too damn cozy.
There are some bright spots about this movie and I am going to rewatch it at home at some point, but purely because it excels at visual effects and, even more so, the film towers over most others in terms of soundscape. It is also, at times, and as is customary with Villeneuve, A Beautiful Cinema (tm). Lots of money went into technical aspects, some scenes are very well crafted. Worth a revisit, maybe even print some still shots from the film and hang them on the wall, as a reminder of how perfect set should be crafted. But it remains a mystery to me, why Villeneuve realised his film the way he did, while insisting on having so much respect for Herbert's work.
What I am aware of, is that Dune is a scattered little film. I guess my main rant is that the pacing is off, the famous Villeneuve's pacing which he tries to copy, sometimes successfully, from cinema masters of old. (Kubrick, Kurosawa). There are pleiades of top Hollywood actors present in this film, way too many I would say. And each of them occupies a small niche, each plays small part, then vanishes, with narrative re-centering on Paul Atreides again. I fault Villeneuve for his ambition, which prompted him to include a dozen great stars and each star doesn't have the time to "open up" and make a print in viewer's mind, the movie rushes on and on in front of my eyes, striving to tell me as much of a story per second as it humanly can.
The obvious other part to this failure is the decision to make a film instead of mini-series or some such. I think that in order to reap maximum benefit from the master's work, to amplify it in the best way, one should try to stay as much within canvas of what is written originally, because that canvas is the original object of interest of viewers. Historically, this is well understood by some, while completely neglected by others. People voted Herbert into the hall of fame of sci-fi, because he was good with words. Use his words, use his pacing, that's why people love him. Villeneuve, or his superiors, decide to part ways with original pacing and to make a film instead of a longer format - the result - the pacing is off, brilliant actors don't have enough time to open up, show their talents, and we sort of waltz past too many events with director trying to tell us as much as possible within a very limited movie format. Feels like watching a comic book unfold. On top of that, the 12 Euro theatre seats I was praising above made me lose consciousness a couple of times for a minute or two - too damn cozy.
There are some bright spots about this movie and I am going to rewatch it at home at some point, but purely because it excels at visual effects and, even more so, the film towers over most others in terms of soundscape. It is also, at times, and as is customary with Villeneuve, A Beautiful Cinema (tm). Lots of money went into technical aspects, some scenes are very well crafted. Worth a revisit, maybe even print some still shots from the film and hang them on the wall, as a reminder of how perfect set should be crafted. But it remains a mystery to me, why Villeneuve realised his film the way he did, while insisting on having so much respect for Herbert's work.
You should read the book. Then you would have an idea why I loathe this.
I actually got an offer from a reactor on YT, the other day, to come on his show and discuss the movie. Seems the two of us have mostly the same opinions, and he was getting eviscerated by most other commenters.
I actually got an offer from a reactor on YT, the other day, to come on his show and discuss the movie. Seems the two of us have mostly the same opinions, and he was getting eviscerated by most other commenters.
Moriarte
Immortal
- Joined
- May 10, 2012
- Messages
- 2,672
I will! The trilogy is sitting on my shelf for a year now. Next time I travel, I’ll finally start reading it.
It would be great if you took the offer. I see only praises on my yt feed when it comes to Dune 2.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Loved Dune part 2, not as much as part one, but I really loved that one.
11 out of 13
11 out of 13
Hey, I was right
I've never even allowed my personal photos to be uploaded (cats are okay; photos of myself or human family is not okay). Putting myself on video is pretty well out of the question.
It was nice of him to offer, though. It's not the first time. Some years ago the guy who runs the Smirking Gun channel suggested I do a Handmaid's Tale review, since I could explain the "Canada storyline" to the American reviewers and the American commenters who sometimes said some really ignorant things both silly and malicious (ie. when Emily takes June's baby, at June's request, with her when she escapes to Canada, some of the American women got hysterical: "What's she gonna feed that baby? She'll starve! Do they even HAVE baby formula in Canada???!"). *facepalm*
banzay13
Emperor
30 years ago the book was good. But now no so good)) Azimov and Heinlein still good. Mostly.
IMO
As for movie, I like it. But many things definitely will be unclear, part 1 especially) if you didn't read book. That's not good
Part of the problem with book vs. movie in Villeneuve's case is that he strutted around, claiming that the movie is a "faithful" adaptation of the book and that he based his movie on the book, not on the Lynch movie.
That's not true, in either case. He changed some fundamental things from the book, and his stillsuits are like a slightly-more-modern copy of the ones used in the Lynch movie, including the nonsensical way that the actors speak and pant into the open air, rather than into the filter that's supposed to cover their mouths. If these people as shown in the movies were really on Arrakis, they'd be dead of dehydration in a week on the open desert, because of improper water conservation.
And one point that was made absolutely clear in Dune and (I think) Children of Dune is the fact that the Harkonnens were red-haired, and so were Jessica, Alia, and Paul's twins. Harkonnen ancestry was obvious. But this movie... the Harkonnens look like a cross between Sontarans (from Doctor Who) and some evil species of sentient potato.
I'll have to confess that I've read a lot more of Asimov's essays and nonfiction than I have of his fiction. I've read some of his robot stories, and "Liar!" is suddenly not so dated as it seemed awhile back, with AI now being possible to program just like that robot was in the story.
Heinlein's books, at least his juvenile space opera ones, haven't aged well. Technology and knowledge have made so many of them obsolete (we're not going to have farming on any of Jupiter's moons, even under a dome, for instance). The Lazarus Long books... yikes. Some of them were good. I still love The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, as it's the best of the Lazarus Long-connected novels that doesn't involve incest... much. The part about the granddaughter marrying her grandfather in a line marriage was a bit weird, but since he was so old and she was so young that it would be basically ceremonial that first night instead of real...
But there are still a few Heinlein stories that are good and not outdated.I think part of the appeal of Dune is the worldbuilding. I can't imagine fanfic based on Asimov or Heinlein's settings that don't involve their characters. In Dune you could create stories that have nothing to do with the book or movie characters, just people in that setting and it would make sense. There's a cute one in the Dune Encyclopedia about a couple of elderly Bene Gesserit sisters who work in the laundry in one of the Chapterhouses. One of them wins a soap contest and the prize is a trip to the pleasure planet of Gamont. They go on the trip, and... well, the ending is cute. Imagine a cross between the Bene Gesserit and the planet Risa in Star Trek and a couple of elderly women who have basically lived like nuns most of their lives being introduced to that kind of lifestyle.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
In a year dominated by the dying embers of the superhero genre and cash grab sequels that nobody wanted, Denis Villeneuve has brought us something a bit special.
I haven't ever read the books and the films were perfectly understandable to me. I also then rather compulsively went through the available (book-focused) wikis (that predate the movies as far as I'm aware) to see if there was anything obvious I was missing . . . I mean, not really? If anything the tricky things are the events (and characters) yet to come.
Is the red hair a requirement for a faithful adaptation? I don't know. Some people will say yes, of course. But "faithful" and "purist" are two separate - and valid - things. I don't think Villeneuve is going to win over every purist, and that's fine. Just as it's fine that book purists exist, and prefer the books (or the miniseries, or even Lynch's adaptation).
But then again I've always been a bit of a "live and let live" type when it comes to adaptations, even ones that consider themselves faithful. There's always a bit of wiggle room, so long as the meaning is carried over. And that is of course where all the discussion, agreement and disagreement live.
Is the red hair a requirement for a faithful adaptation? I don't know. Some people will say yes, of course. But "faithful" and "purist" are two separate - and valid - things. I don't think Villeneuve is going to win over every purist, and that's fine. Just as it's fine that book purists exist, and prefer the books (or the miniseries, or even Lynch's adaptation).
But then again I've always been a bit of a "live and let live" type when it comes to adaptations, even ones that consider themselves faithful. There's always a bit of wiggle room, so long as the meaning is carried over. And that is of course where all the discussion, agreement and disagreement live.
banzay13
Emperor
If you compare with latest modern adoptation of others books, the Dune look quit good. It's an movie, and as it - it look good.Part of the problem with book vs. movie in Villeneuve's case is that he strutted around, claiming that the movie is a "faithful" adaptation of the book and that he based his movie on the book, not on the Lynch movie.
That's not true, in either case. He changed some fundamental things from the book, and his stillsuits are like a slightly-more-modern copy of the ones used in the Lynch movie, including the nonsensical way that the actors speak and pant into the open air, rather than into the filter that's supposed to cover their mouths. If these people as shown in the movies were really on Arrakis, they'd be dead of dehydration in a week on the open desert, because of improper water conservation.
And one point that was made absolutely clear in Dune and (I think) Children of Dune is the fact that the Harkonnens were red-haired, and so were Jessica, Alia, and Paul's twins. Harkonnen ancestry was obvious. But this movie... the Harkonnens look like a cross between Sontarans (from Doctor Who) and some evil species of sentient potato.
I'll have to confess that I've read a lot more of Asimov's essays and nonfiction than I have of his fiction. I've read some of his robot stories, and "Liar!" is suddenly not so dated as it seemed awhile back, with AI now being possible to program just like that robot was in the story.
Heinlein's books, at least his juvenile space opera ones, haven't aged well. Technology and knowledge have made so many of them obsolete (we're not going to have farming on any of Jupiter's moons, even under a dome, for instance). The Lazarus Long books... yikes. Some of them were good. I still love The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, as it's the best of the Lazarus Long-connected novels that doesn't involve incest... much. The part about the granddaughter marrying her grandfather in a line marriage was a bit weird, but since he was so old and she was so young that it would be basically ceremonial that first night instead of real...
I think part of the appeal of Dune is the worldbuilding. I can't imagine fanfic based on Asimov or Heinlein's settings that don't involve their characters. In Dune you could create stories that have nothing to do with the book or movie characters, just people in that setting and it would make sense. There's a cute one in the Dune Encyclopedia about a couple of elderly Bene Gesserit sisters who work in the laundry in one of the Chapterhouses. One of them wins a soap contest and the prize is a trip to the pleasure planet of Gamont. They go on the trip, and... well, the ending is cute. Imagine a cross between the Bene Gesserit and the planet Risa in Star Trek and a couple of elderly women who have basically lived like nuns most of their lives being introduced to that kind of lifestyle.
Have you read brothers Strugatsky books? I found them much later, than Americans si-fi authors. And their future world is very different.
Arkady and Boris Strugatsky - Wikipedia
Comrade Ceasefire
Simmer slowly
I've not read them, but thanks for the suggestion.If you compare with latest modern adoptation of others books, the Dune look quit good. It's an movie, and as it - it look good.
Have you read brothers Strugatsky books? I found them much later, than Americans si-fi authors. And their future world is very different.
Especially good latest and Hard to be GodArkady and Boris Strugatsky - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
My favourite books are by the Polish author, Stanislaw Lem who was very popular in the USSR and most of Eastern Europe. I'm sure you know Andrei Tarkovky's film version of Solaris. (A lot better than the 2002 American version which I thought missed a lot of the points Lem was trying to make.)
We named our business "Cyberiad" after (IMO) Lem's best work: The Cyberiad - Fables for the Cybernetic Age. I'd love to see a movie made from that book! The Futurological Congress and The Star Diaries would also make great movies.
The Tales of Ijon Tichy was made into a series in Germany, and it has some of the funniest cheap sets and robots I have ever seen.
Ijon Tichy: Space Pilot - Wikipedia
Well, some things were obvious to me, but then I first read the novels in the early-mid 1980s, and have read all of them multiple times, plus multiple readings of parts of the Dune Encyclopedia. Frank Herbert approved the Encyclopedia, so it's as good as canon as far as I'm concerned even with FH's caveat that he reserved the right to contradict it in his future novels if he considered it necessary - which he did in a pretty big way in Heretics and Chapterhouse, by continuing to make Duncan Idaho the continuing character.
In the Encyclopedia, which covers the first four books, McNelly stated that the Duncan Idaho who appears in God Emperor of Dune was also known as "Duncan-the-Last" and forbade that anyone should ever resurrect him as a ghola again because as far back as his original life, he felt that when you're dead, that's it, and he was never comfortable with being resurrected without his consent - that's a very pertinent point he brings up with Leto in God Emperor, asking him, "Did you ever even ASK me (any of the Duncan gholas) if I wanted to come back?" Leto has to admit that it had never occurred to him to ask. He had never even considered that Duncan might not want to be resurrected over and over, during all those millennia, that he considered his first death - saving Paul and Jessica - to be final.
This can easily be forgiven with FH, though, by rationalizing that the Bene Gesserit didn't give a damn about Duncan's wishes any more than Leto II did. They took what they wanted, and they wanted Duncan as part of their breeding program.
Consistency is a requirement for a faithful adaptation, or at least plausible consistency. In the 2000 miniseries, for instance, the Atreides family - Leto, Jessica, and Paul - were shades of blond, while the Harkonnens had red hair. But there are shades of blond that are close to red - I'm blonde, but have a little bit of red in my hair, thanks to my mother, who came from a family of redheads (freaked my grandmother out, the first time she saw my mother's family; she said she'd never seen so many red-haired people at once in her life). So I can forgive the miniseries somewhat. The Lynch movie was spot-on, with having both Jessica and Alia be redheads, along with the Baron, Rabban, and Feyd. The adult miniseries Alia is dark-haired, so maybe she got that from Jessica's mother (who is NOT Mohiam, I do not give a fraction of a damn what the nuDune books say, since they blatantly contradict FH's statement of who Jessica's mother is).
So if someone is going to make a point of saying that Jessica resembles her father, the Baron, either he's going to have to grow some hair to match her hair color or she's going to have to morph into a half-Sontaran, half-mutant potato.
There's wiggle room and then there's a yawning chasm and tap dancing to pretend the chasm doesn't exist.
The miniseries was a better adaptation in most ways, even if William Hurt gives Leto the personality of a cardboard box (Jurgen Prochnow, who played Leto in the Lynch movie, absolutely nailed it) and Susan Sarandon was horribly miscast in the Children of Dune miniseries.If you compare with latest modern adoptation of others books, the Dune look quit good. It's an movie, and as it - it look good.
Have you read brothers Strugatsky books? I found them much later, than Americans si-fi authors. And their future world is very different.
Especially good latest and Hard to be GodArkady and Boris Strugatsky - Wikipedia
I have not read the other authors you mention.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Preamble & context: Huge Dune fan here, I've read the novel 6-7 times and the whole sixology twice, as well as most of the prequels/sequels by the son & his muse.
I liked part 1 more than part 2, but.. I have seen part 1 8 times now, and part 2 just once. So my opinions might change after I rewatch part 2 again and take it in a second time.
Part 1 flowed incredibly well as a setup to the story, IMO. I found the pacing in part 2 a bit off.. A part of the problem was that the storyline was compressed by multiple years, I assume so that 2 year old Alia wouldn't have to be shown acting and speaking like an adult, which I admit would probably look goofy and just wrong no matter how you did it. Maybe there was no other way around that? It just compressed everything way too much, is the problem. Paul's son dying was cut.. which I always felt helped you understand a bit better why Paul embraced his role as messiah after he struggled with his visions of the future so much. He really wanted revenge. So this part was a bit rushed. In the book you also get a much better sense of how long it takes Paul to win over the Fremen, all he has to do to accomplish that, that it was a prolonged conflict and war against the Harkonnen, etc. We got some scenes in the movie that tell this part of the story, but I don't think they come across with nearly as much impact as in the novel.. and newcomers to Dune might miss many of the subtexts and nuanced parts of the story being told here. Like for instance, when he's in the sietch talking to the Fremen. That's like 4-6 different scenes all in one. I get that an adaptation has to modify the story, there is no way around that, but again, I feel like the story was rushed in this regard. The part where Paul has to be by himself and survive in the desert.. that went by way too quick too.
I don't know how I would have done this differently, but things were differently rushed. Honestly, this would have made more sense as 3 parts, and not just 2... but I get that the studio might have been hesitant to approve such an approach. So I can't really fault DV all that much, but.. nevertheless, things felt rushed, so I have to comment on it.
I don't really have any faults with any of the other changes. I understand why Chani was not as supportive of Paul as in the novel. In the novel Paul has many doubts and related internal monologue that would have been hard to film (and mainly wasn't). But that part of the story is vital, and I feel Chani taking the place of Paul's thoughts here makes sense. It's a big change from the novel, but I get it. Without it, that part of the story would have been excluded. So I'm down with this change. I also bet DV has plans for part 3 and Chani's role in it, that this will play into.
The worm riding part was done very well. Loved it. I wish they showed you how exactly the Fremen dismount the worm after riding it.. because it seems to be a very common question from those who have seen the movie but haven't read the books. Not a huge problem, but it seems they could have easily included this in a short scene.
The emperor.. was alright. I felt that he could have improved the way he acted the role.. although who am I to say, as a non-actor? It just seemed like he was a bit uninspired about it.. just a bit. And there was one scene where he talked the way people make fun of him for talking. Just one scene.. All other scenes he had he talked like a normal human being. That one scene really stood out to me. It almost felt like a parody? Maybe I'll change my mind when I rewatch.
I also missed seeing Thufir Hawat. They also cut his part of the story out, which was a shame. I also wish they explained the water of life parts a bit better. Many who haven't read the novels didn't really end up understanding how that experience changed Jessica and Paul and what sort of impact that had on them.
Overall I understand most of the changes made when adapting this to the big screen. It makes sense to me to focus on the religious/messiah aspect while downplaying or completely cutting out other parts of the story. You can't do it all in a movie, so I get that. I just wish the story wasn't compressed the way it was. Having said that though.. yeah.. I don't know how I would have done that differently.
Hopefully the movies get even more people reading the novel. It's an amazing example of worldbuilding, with many overlaying and interconnected angles to the story that aren't apparent during the first.. or even second or third readthrough. And some only become apparent after you read Dune Messiah and eventually GEOD.
Yeah, it's a novel written in the 60s, and you can tell, but it's a book you can read many times, picking up different things each time. I honestly don't know of any other book that has that much re-read value. You might hate him for it, but Herbert just doesn't explain or even show you some things.. you have to work them out for yourself. The first time I read the novel I thought it was a somewhat simple hero's journey type story.. How wrong I was
Overall here is my rating
Part 1 - 9.4/10
Part 2 - 8.9/10
I liked part 1 more than part 2, but.. I have seen part 1 8 times now, and part 2 just once. So my opinions might change after I rewatch part 2 again and take it in a second time.
Part 1 flowed incredibly well as a setup to the story, IMO. I found the pacing in part 2 a bit off.. A part of the problem was that the storyline was compressed by multiple years, I assume so that 2 year old Alia wouldn't have to be shown acting and speaking like an adult, which I admit would probably look goofy and just wrong no matter how you did it. Maybe there was no other way around that? It just compressed everything way too much, is the problem. Paul's son dying was cut.. which I always felt helped you understand a bit better why Paul embraced his role as messiah after he struggled with his visions of the future so much. He really wanted revenge. So this part was a bit rushed. In the book you also get a much better sense of how long it takes Paul to win over the Fremen, all he has to do to accomplish that, that it was a prolonged conflict and war against the Harkonnen, etc. We got some scenes in the movie that tell this part of the story, but I don't think they come across with nearly as much impact as in the novel.. and newcomers to Dune might miss many of the subtexts and nuanced parts of the story being told here. Like for instance, when he's in the sietch talking to the Fremen. That's like 4-6 different scenes all in one. I get that an adaptation has to modify the story, there is no way around that, but again, I feel like the story was rushed in this regard. The part where Paul has to be by himself and survive in the desert.. that went by way too quick too.
I don't know how I would have done this differently, but things were differently rushed. Honestly, this would have made more sense as 3 parts, and not just 2... but I get that the studio might have been hesitant to approve such an approach. So I can't really fault DV all that much, but.. nevertheless, things felt rushed, so I have to comment on it.
I don't really have any faults with any of the other changes. I understand why Chani was not as supportive of Paul as in the novel. In the novel Paul has many doubts and related internal monologue that would have been hard to film (and mainly wasn't). But that part of the story is vital, and I feel Chani taking the place of Paul's thoughts here makes sense. It's a big change from the novel, but I get it. Without it, that part of the story would have been excluded. So I'm down with this change. I also bet DV has plans for part 3 and Chani's role in it, that this will play into.
The worm riding part was done very well. Loved it. I wish they showed you how exactly the Fremen dismount the worm after riding it.. because it seems to be a very common question from those who have seen the movie but haven't read the books. Not a huge problem, but it seems they could have easily included this in a short scene.
The emperor.. was alright. I felt that he could have improved the way he acted the role.. although who am I to say, as a non-actor? It just seemed like he was a bit uninspired about it.. just a bit. And there was one scene where he talked the way people make fun of him for talking. Just one scene.. All other scenes he had he talked like a normal human being. That one scene really stood out to me. It almost felt like a parody? Maybe I'll change my mind when I rewatch.
I also missed seeing Thufir Hawat. They also cut his part of the story out, which was a shame. I also wish they explained the water of life parts a bit better. Many who haven't read the novels didn't really end up understanding how that experience changed Jessica and Paul and what sort of impact that had on them.
Overall I understand most of the changes made when adapting this to the big screen. It makes sense to me to focus on the religious/messiah aspect while downplaying or completely cutting out other parts of the story. You can't do it all in a movie, so I get that. I just wish the story wasn't compressed the way it was. Having said that though.. yeah.. I don't know how I would have done that differently.
Hopefully the movies get even more people reading the novel. It's an amazing example of worldbuilding, with many overlaying and interconnected angles to the story that aren't apparent during the first.. or even second or third readthrough. And some only become apparent after you read Dune Messiah and eventually GEOD.
Yeah, it's a novel written in the 60s, and you can tell, but it's a book you can read many times, picking up different things each time. I honestly don't know of any other book that has that much re-read value. You might hate him for it, but Herbert just doesn't explain or even show you some things.. you have to work them out for yourself. The first time I read the novel I thought it was a somewhat simple hero's journey type story.. How wrong I was
Overall here is my rating
Part 1 - 9.4/10
Part 2 - 8.9/10
It surprised me why the director went out of his way to state that his adaptation would be the one closer to the books, when it is the one (of the existing three) that appears to be further away from the book material.
They plan to film at least a third movie, which will have nothing like the book's plot since Paul's sister didn't kill Vladimir now.
They plan to film at least a third movie, which will have nothing like the book's plot since Paul's sister didn't kill Vladimir now.
