I breakdown the biggest differences between the Dune Part 2 movie and Frank Herbert's book. There are a few other changes mentioned in my 'Explained' and 'Biggest Questions' videos that I posted last week, so I'd recommend checking out those uploads on my channel too. But what differences did you pick out in the film and what was your overall impressions of the changes made?
@@LuisSierra42think of it like the scene in The Matrix Revolutions(I think?) where everyone on Zion was celebrating and the camera slowed down showing everyone dancing erotically. Now add spice and an orgy.
@@ugoeze7360 Ah, you mean the rave scene in Matrix Reloaded. If we are talking about an actual orgy, then that's why it was cut, the movie needed a PG13 rating
Great breakdown! You're the first reviewer I've seen mention the positive change to the attack on Sietch Tabr (and the removal of Leto II). It's something I think a lot of people missed, but it greatly improves upon the book. It really makes it seem like Paul's hand is forced and he has to reluctantly accept his terrible purpose and go south to drink the water of life. It also gives greater reasoning behind the final battle, and allows for build-up to the final battle, where in the book Paul just sees that the great houses are already there, and immediately attacks, and then the attack on Sietch Tabr happens offscreen. It's much less impactful in the book. Another big change is the amount of Fremen that join Paul. In the book it's a bit unclear but it seems like it's just Paul's Fedaykin from Sietch Tabr who participate in the final battle, and the scene where Paul decides not to kill Stilgar only happens in front of a small group of Fremen. There's also no Great War council in the book (although it's mentioned a couple councillors showed up, but they're not really mentioned), so there's no feeling like Paul has united all of the Fremen on the planet. In my opinion the confrontation between Gurney and Jessica in the book was pointless, as it had literally no consequence and any tension that was created was immediately resolved in a single conversation, and then it was as if nothing happened. But it is true that it may have been good foreshadowing for the following book. I feel the same way about Thufir Hawat, as we don't even see him in part 2 of the book (just hear about him from others) and when he does show up he immediately dies. But it would have been good world building to see Thufir's training with Paul. And the changes to Chani made a whole lot of sense to me, their connection seems genuine as Chani is literally the only person wo Paul knows who isn't a worshipper following a false prophecy (like the Fremen), a follower (like Gurney), trying to manipulate him (Jessica), or trying to kill him (everyone else). She's the only one who sees things the same way as Paul, so it makes sense that Paul would love her. He wouldn't want to be with a worshipper. Another thing not mentioned here is that in the book the dream of turning Arrakis into a paradise is the idea of Liet Kynes' father, an offworlder. In the film, it's presented as an ancient prophecy, which I feel gives it more weight, and aligns with the Fremen's self-sufficiency and distrust of offworlders.
I feel like the changes to Chani make her a Victim. In the movie, she was forced against her will to help Paul via the Voice & Paul just "took" the Hand of Irulan. In the Book, Chani choose to help Paul and even convinved him that a marriage to Irulan is a good thing.
The last scene in the movie was so much of a polar opposite from the ending of the book that it killed all emotion I was feeling. I don't understand how people can say it's not a big change at all. In the next movie they'll either adapt Dune Messiah faithfully, making the change meaningless in the first place, or completely rewrite Paul and Chani's relationship making it even more of a mess.
My only complaint really is that Jessica threw up. Her Bene Gesserit training gives her full control of her own body, it would literally be the last thing she would do.
It’s to remind viewers who watched Dune I that she’s pregnant. And it gives Stilgar a chance to reinforce: “water is the only thing that matters.” But yeah. I hated it too.
@@brandongrundmeyer7793I loved the entire film except the part after the battle where gurney and the fremen are burning bodies. After the film established that no water is wasted even from the dead
One of the biggest changes I noticed , which no one has acknowledged in the videos I’ve watched, was the elimination of Janis’s wife and kids from the equation. I was ok with it, because it helped showcase the more compelling love story between Chani and Paul.
After making the video and posting it, I literally remembered everything with Harah and was so bummed I forgot to include it. I feel the same as you do about that.
I think at least in having Jamis' children inherited by Paul, with Harah having died long ago and/or having more of a group of surrogate mothers taking care of them, would have made for a much more compelling induction of Paul into fremen culture. He basically just falls into a role of cultural and religious leader in a matter of a few months and there's not much friction in the process on a relationship basis. Really flattens a lot of the characters and also fremen culture - a culture that is the way it is for a reason
@@zelgkopitar8799 maybe I don't know enough about Liet, but I didn't see much of an issue with the change tbh. I'm just upset they dropped his (her) entire relevance in Part 2. So much that was built up in Part 1 was just forgotten in Part 2. It makes me sad because I found Part 1 really well done even though there were obvious omissions
You are absolutely wrong about that. In the book, Harah indeed physically offered herself to Paul, saying she was older, but still attractive and of value. And Paul demonstrated how much he loved Chani, by politely rejecting her. You are absolutely 180 degrees 100% wrong.
I would mention 3 more differences: 1 - Jessica was made in the film a much more proactive force in making Paul the Muad’dib. In the book she doesn’t know he’s about to drink the water of life and in the movie she basically orchestrates it. 2 - The scene where Gurney meets Paul again is massively underplayed in the movie. In the book it’s a really touching scene (having known all that time that Gurney is with the smugglers) and it has some great quotes that weren’t used in the movie (Paul saying to him “here some of the things you’re not meant to see”). 3 - Stilgar was kinda made into a caricature in the movie. In the book Paul is indeed worried that he’s turning from a friend to a follower but in the movie his belief in the Paul/Lisan Al Gaib prophecy is completely taking over the character, stripping him of his leadership aspect. Javier Bardem is great though, really loved his performance.
About #3, as we all know, a movie doesn’t have the luxury of time and space to convey a message that a book has. Stilgar was used as a figurehead for the believers of the prophecy and his leadership must be blunted to enhance Paul’s own ascendancy to leadership. (Chani represents the sceptical faction.)
@@JaimeLessainsI respectfully disagree. There are plenty of characters in the movie who are loyal followers of others without losing their own gravity as an authority figure. Stilgar could have been written to believe in the prophecy without becoming such a sycophant to Paul. Having Stilgar retain his gravitas would have enhanced the cautionary aspect, not weakened it. As it would have shown that even very strong men can fall victim to religious fairy tales.
@@JaimeLessains They should have never had the anti prophecy faction. That's what forced Stilgar into the box of being a super religious guy that instantly believes in the Muad dib. And they also make him less of a leader. he has to ask some council in his sietch, permission to allow jessica and paul to live there. Anyway it never feels like he's radicalizing in the book. He's a hardcore believer from the start. The book stilgar believes, but he doesn't necessarily believe in Paul the moment they meet. Only after Paul fits the prophecy and does some miracelous stuff does Stilgar slowly turn more and more radical. Esp after Paul starts to change their way of life to suit his goals better (e.g. not challenging Stilgar because he wants Stilgar as one of his men) But noooo .. They had to have Chani be too cool to school
the changes left a bad enough taste in my mouth to pretty much sour part 2. north and south, evil jessica, completely different chani, comic relief stilgar, no spacing guild, no dinner party, no real exploration of who the fremen were other than being ‘arab muslims’, i didn’t feel just how valuable water actually is there. personally i didn’t much care for zendaya performance either. i like part 1 for the most part and i really wanted to like part 2 but some of the changes fundamentally altered some of the things i loved so much about the novel.
And this was so much of what made the entire idea so cool to me. That's a Bene Gesserit voice, a Bene Gesserit invention that is being used in a way unpredicted by them. It's ironic.
Yeah the lack of the voice was very telling of how rushed this movie was. But even still, they could have done a much more efficient job of incorporating book elements into this film. Disappointing.
@@do_it_for_content I feel this could have been a 12 episode high budget limited series. I'm re-reading the book and there is SO much stuff they excised, especially having to do with Mentats. In the movie we hardly have a clue what Thufir does or even what his name is. In the book he's clearly responsible for the entire family's security and he "struck fear into the heart of the emperor himself." A major aspect of the Harkonnen plotting against House Atreides was figuring out how to compromise Thufir's functioning as a mentat, because he is so good. The idea that there are people with elevated mental training instead of computers was generally underemphasized in the movie. Entire episodes could have been dedicated to the chess game that happens between Harkonnens and Atreides in the first third of the book, with thd Atreides knowing of an ambush but miscalculating where it's coming from, and why.
I think that reducing the time scale (to less than 9 months) takes away the incredible effort that it took for Paul to regain control of Arrakis. It seemed all too easy (learning the Fremen customs and language, organizing militias, disrupting trade, spreading the myth of the messiah, etc.).
I agree. As someone that has a lot of complaints about the movie though. I do kinda get why. Because they couldn't do Alia.. how are you going to have a 2 year old todler talking and acting like an adult? Even killing people. If they had a broader time scale then Alia would have to be included. But honestly, they could just have kept Alia a baby that telephatically communicated with Jessica and still have more time passing than less than 9 months
I think the removal of the space guild severely changes the world of Dune and the stakes of the story. Without any context as to how crucial spice is to the functioning of the commerce and governance of the worlds it is reduced to a simple resource to fight over like oil in the Middle East. We really never get to see how the choking of spice affects the key parties and leads inevitably to the conclusion of the film, drawing them all to Arrakis for the climax. The role of the Guild in the betrayal of House Atreides and their eventually having to flip to Paul's side to preserve their supply of spice I see as crucial to a full understanding of the weight of the events on Arrakis to the whole Empire.
They are barely mentioned in the first book. Basically no detailed info given about them. Don’t understand why people keep whinging about them not being in the film.
@@greywildgreen they also literally are in the movie idk what people are talking about. I watched the movie before reading the book and I was well aware of who they were
The other main benefit of the lack of a significant time jump is (from a cinematic point of view) it helps illustrate Stilgar and the other Fremen factions' religious fanaticism toward Paul, owing to it happening over a shorter period of time.
One thing I noticed visually with Paul ending the Baron is that while he used his crysknife, not a gom jabbar, the method was the same as a gom jabbar, even to the reference of treating his body as less than an animal.
@@SuperStella1111 Eh, it was ok. It was much cooler when he stabbed the knife under Feyd's chin during their fight. Also didn't like that Feyd fought fair and that he stabbed Paul twice very deeply.
I was surprised Jessica didn't give birth in the movie, but then again having a 2 year spice child prophet fighting has a good chance of looking pretty silly in a movie.
I was wondering how they were going to pull off the talking baby. It worked in the book, but I count figure it his they'd do it in the film . This is my favorite change from the book to the movie. I loved that.
Tyvm for your insightful critique. I read the books every year for decades, each time noticing another detail of the story or another impactful line. I was so disappointed by D. Lynch adaptation and loved D. Villeneuve's fidelity to the intent of F. Herbert's work. I will be watching it next week and come fully prepared to changes and looking forward to the poetry that movies can bring. I hope it encourages many younger viewers to read the novels and learn from the depth of F. Herbert's vision.
@@SageWon-1aussie Loved the adaptation: faithful to the saga and underlying message, satisfying to the readers and enjoyable to those new to the story. The visual, the sound track, the acting, the tasteful special effects were great. Glad a lot of the 'words' became camera, light, angles, colours, facial expressions and implied. It's a layered movie that those in the know will grasp the subtleties of and others might sense. It's intelligent for an audience allowed to know, ignore or get informed. Looking forward to how D. Villeneuve will handle the next part... and viewers surprises at where Paul is leading the empire, how and why.
@@isiseungella4688 When you said next week, I didn't realise you meant in the next ten hours. This does not describe my experience at all, but then I really liked the depth of the book. Glad you liked the movie, hopefully it will encourage people to grapple with the complexities of the book heya.
@SageWon-1aussie 5 days apart, different week. I wasn't sure which day of that following week we could drive to town. I don't live in a big city. There's is 1 cinema for the whole town.
Sorry, but the DV version is far less daring and interesting than the 1984 version. DV seems to want to make a bland, predictable, long winded turd movies. Part 2 just kept going and going and going...so boring. I did like the spice harvesters in the DV version, that was excellent....the rest, like the story telling, just bad.
I don’t think anyone will care but in my opinion Dune part 1 was a bloody brilliant film AND adaptation of the book. Part 2 was simply a good film - a very good one ofc - but it wasn’t such a good adaptation. In fact it deviates quite drastically by the end. But because I read the books before watching the films it didn’t seem to be the “greatest movie ever” like some have claimed. If you never read the books it would feel like that because of excellent writing and SFX
I wanted to see more of Paul training the Fremen. I wanted to see Paul moving with enhanced speed. I wanted the Third Stage Navigator "Paul must be killed" scene. I wanted Paul to show more of his powers. After the fight with Feyd, I wanted Paul to split his body with the Voice. And I really didn't like Chani being pissed off.
You forgot two major points. Paul learnt how to manipulate the spice molecule and destroy all spice. That’s how he threaten the emperor, not with the atomic but with spice molecule manipulation. The tip of Freud’s knife was poisoned and Paul adjusted his body to this when Freud thought he had Paul, Paul then adjusted the poison and killed him.
Great job summarizing the key changes. Those were the main ones I noticed. Hawat being removed made logical sense because I never bought into the idea of the Baron being stupid enough to bring a loyal member of Leto’s inner circle as his advisor. I also felt a big flaw in the book Dune was Paul having three male advisors that all started to blend together, so I understand why his presence in the first movie was lessened. However, it led to another problem I had with Dune 2 in that there were less Baron scenes and his menace as a threat was lessened compared to the book. His book scenes with how he subjugated Hawat increased his menace and cruelty.
I can't stand faux girl power Chani. It's a step too far from her character in the book. It kind of ruined part two for me. That and the absence of the spice guild.
Blade Runner 2049 is by far a better movie than the Dune adaptations. If you read the books it's just too much to ever squeeze into a movie format and serve the story correctly.
The biggest problem i had with the changes to Chani's character, is that i see her character was always as loyal to Paul as he was to her, and this movie sort of ends on a sour note as far as their relationship, and that me sad as far as the "end of a book" goes. Her primary characteristic, is thus betrayed, even though adding this side of strength and independence to her makes her a deeper more interesting character, i don't think it serves her part in the story.
I absolutley loved how they changed her character. She became a reminder to the audience that Paul is a fabricated Messiah, and that sort of helps transmit Herbert's critique to the Messieh idea and culture around it
This is the Thematic adaptation of Dune. And in order to portray the themes most effectively on screen, changes are necessary. Every great adaptation that captures the themes of the source contains such necessary changes, because literature and cinema are so inherently different. The various adaptations all approach the source novel with different motivations, and as such, can complement and supplement one another quite well. The Lynch film, for what it's worth, captured the weirdness of Dune, the miniseries is very much the Story adaptation, and Villenueve is giving us a visually spectacular take on the themes of Dune, while also staying *mostly* true to the events of the book. So far, I'm absolutely loving it, and looking forward to Messiah.
This movie has almost nothing from the book in it. The narrative portrayed in this movie was firmly rejected by Paul on the day Leto died in the book Herbert wrote.
Drink water of life. Turns you into an instant asshole. That was another change. Also, when the rev mother called Paul "Abomination" That made no sense.
I do wish that the knife fight in the end was better. In the book it was much more complicated; in the movie I can't even see how Paul actually kills Feyd...
On Gurney/Jessica: Nobody seems to have picked up on a huge difference in Dune 1: In the book, the first part is like a Hitchcock psycho thriller. In the second book scene, the baron reveals his plan, the traitor and every detail including that he wants all advisors of Leto to believe that Jessica is the traitor. In the film, the first part looks similar to the book, but is told in a totally different style. We don’t know about the traitor and Jessica is never suspected. I assumed it’s because the psycho thriller style was too different from the epic adventure style used later.
I was disappointed they didnt talk about folding space with the spice, like they did in David Lynch's version..that would have been cool to see Deni's take on that..but maybe it was left out because he probably couldnt put it in the film to make sense how a spice can distort space to move from one galaxy to the next..who knows
We saw how space travel works in part one, although we didn't see the whole process or logic behind it. The Guild Heighliner is what folds space. The Guild Navigators just trace safe paths between the stars, with the help of lots of spice.
Hopefully they'll talk about it Dune: messiah where Paul is going to be emperor. Spice a very important part of the Empire and politic power in this universe.
If I remember correctly you actually can see space folded as there is a planet on the other side of the guild highliner when reverand mother mohiam visits Caladan in part one.
The lack of the spacing guild in part 2 was the only disappointment for me. I enjoy everything space travel related when it comes to sci fi so I was hoping for a more advanced depiction of what the navigators do to deliver travel and for me in the end this is the only thing that slightly disconnects this movie from being the sci fi drama I feel it should be. All in all it’s not as important as the many other things Dennie focused on and doesn’t hurt the story at all so there you have it. That’s probably why it was omitted. Wonderful video as always Cortex. Thank you
All the changes in this movie are justified. Hate to admit it but the novel had narrative issues and this movie streamlined the story. I'm sure if Frank Herbert wrote the novel in a traditional way, the story would have been closer to what you see in this movie.
I mostly agree. And Denis ended the film with the message that herbert wanted to get across to the reader. Most of the changes serve getting to that ending message
@CortexVideos Agreed. That's exactly what I got from it too. Many readers forget that the first Dune novel was actually written as magazine serials so that's why so many characters, mythology elements, and plot points were introduced. Herbert did all of that to keep each entry of the serial interesting! I get the impression that Denis seems to have understood this very well.
I would agree more if Villeneuve made the decisions about how to retell the story first, and then decided on how many movies he will need to do it properly. Sadly, that is not the case, and all of the changes stem from the decision to cram the story into two movies, instead of three. He had to invent new motivations to progress things faster. The first movie had a great pacing, this one feels very rushed. I enjoyed the movie but I think it is greatly compromised, and had he been able to make two more movies, Villeneuve would have made both of them significantly better than this one.
The movie misses alot of themes. Movie is good. Book is best. I'm not even a big book reader. I read it like 4 years ago. When the first dune trailer came out. The movie cut out lots of things. And added bunch of stupid crap. Paul n his family aren't the good guys. Yes herkonens are monsters. But atreides aren't the good guys. The movie didn't detail the importance of spice. Mentats are no where to be found in the 2nd movie. The trees are looked at with envy. They are not scared. And more. It affects the theme of dune.
My opinion is : l don’t care if the movie scenes match with the book or not . I enjoyed watching it without comparing with the book . It’s a great movie which has been made with a great director and I will be watching dune2 many times until the next part .
I couldn't agree more. As look at it captyres the spirit, the characters and the main story and then i can't ask for more. Especially with a book as dense and difficult to adapt as dune is
I watched it immediately after re-reading the book and directly comparing it to the book, and even I think it was an amazing adaptation. There are things that were changed that were improvements upon the book even.
My dude, without the book there is no movie. It’s not possible to separate them even if you wanted to…Frank Herbert felt that he made a mistake in the way he wrote Paul. The character was intended to be seen as an anti-hero rather than idolized by the audience. In that way, the film does a nice job of using Chani to highlight this more nuanced depiction of Paul.
Everyone keeps saying chani was just his love interest , i would ask what book you read , she was a strong fighter who met challenges in his stead , they were the love story and the solid connection to pauls world , the book showed the strong relationship in the face of political obligation , "those called concubine history will call , wives",-Chani, Dune
I felt like the relationship in the book was hollow - there's a bit of flirting early on but it seems just physical, and then she treats him pretty much the same way as all the other Fremen, as the chosen one. I like how in the film Chani is the only one to see things the same way as Paul - it makes a lot more sense why he would want to be with her, she's his conscience and the only person not worshipping him because of a false prophecy.
@@tb45g what false prophecy!? He IS the guy he claims to be , there is the biggest problem , hes not a "false profit" the nuns are mad at Jessica for having him early. He IS the voice from the outer world they speak of he was PLANNED by the sisterhood. Not a "false" anything.
@@rainjones3212 Exactly, he was planned, not prophesied. The Bene Gesserit aren't religious. The "prophecy" is a made-up religion that exists in different forms all over the galaxy in order to support the rise of a Kwizatz Haderach, and support the Bene Gesserit's plans and protect them. It's purposefully open-ended so as to accommodate the many ways the Bene Gesserit could enact their plan. But most of the things that are part of the prophecy are simply things the Bene Gesserit are trained to do (and things the Spacing Guild can do). And they are trained to take advantage of the myths planted by them in previous generations. But the Bene Gesserit don't believe in destiny or religion, they simply planted those superstitions in order to eventually take control. They didn't believe a Kwizatz Haderach would come, rather they planned to create one. But he could have just as easily have appeared on Geidi Prime as on Arrakis. It's not some magical or mystical thing, it's just the end result of the Bene Gesserit's program.
@@rainjones3212 The Quizac Haderach is a real thing, and Paul turns out to be it, but Lisan Al Gaib (the voice from the outer world) is just a story the BG planted to aid their own, should they ever find themselves in a pickle on this godforsaken planet (and they did this everywhere they went, to cover all bets). It's a tool to rally the locals and obtain their help. The BG never planned for Paul to land there, take leadership of the Fremen, use them to take over the entire empire and, ultimately, cripple their realm of influence. They wanted to create a superhuman they could control, but accidentally created a living god who turned all of their meticulous millennia-long scheming against them. For the Fremen like Chani, who could see through the entire enterprise, he was a false prophet because there was never any prophet to begin with, not because Paul wasn't it.
@@rainjones3212 its not a prophecy, its set up to be a prophecy. All the tests they had to do were trained by the bene geneserit as a way to protect them if they to come undeer danger on the planet. Paul was a product of bene gessirit breeding scheme to produce a human who can bridge time and space. There was nothing mystical about it, it was all science and all pre planned
Change to Chani is the most important. Book Chani is too go-with-the-flow. Film Chani is discerning, clear-eyed: she is Paul’s equal and sees through him. It makes their connection deeper and she is a better character.
Would have been nice to see some scenes where they disagree more. From what I remember in the movie they don’t talk at all about the direction he is leading them.
Yes because in order to have a strong female character, She has to act like a girl boss from the year 2024. Only women with a modern western mindset are truly empowered.. And interesting.. right?
I believe the changes proved beneficial sure a few more minutes would have been even better but with this I am more than happy. I love this film to pieces
I loved the film and think the changes were not too bad. I do hate that they cut Thufir Hawat from the movie as he wasn't given much in the first movie. Having Chani be the voice of reason was a great change but it does pose the question as to how Denis Villeneuve will be able to bring her an Paul back together for the third movie as them being together is important for the plot of the Dune Messiah.
It would have been cool to see Thufir more, but I definitely understand why he was cut. He doesn't have any POV scenes in the second half of the book and he's not even present for any scenes either until the end where he just dies. I really just wish they'd added more scenes with him training Paul in the first film.
My issue on the Chani change was mostly that it felt partially like it would have been VERY important for them to have had some on screen dialog where he explains (to some extent) what/how things are going to go down. She could still reject that in the short term and not mess up the story (I mean, it's a LOT to take in). But... we don't get that, which makes it feel kind of like they just didn't use their words... Maybe they did off screen, but what we got felt like he blindsided her quite a bit more than it seems like would be reasonable. Like... there's a STRONG reason why it's going to go the direction it does.
If they didn't spent so much time on large, spectacle scenes that usually made no sense they could have added a lot more of the content you mentioned and made a much better movie.
Lynch's depiction of Alia wasn't silly, it was just faithful to the book. As far as adding the Northern v Southern Fremen conflict and the changes to Chani, 'interesting' and 'relatable' is code for secularizing the story for a modern audience.
"is code for secularizing the story for a modern audience" When Dune was released most westerners knew very little of the arabic culture Dune portrayed. They know rather more of it now due to blobalization and conflicts that affect them. There is no need to patronize a modern audience.
In the book it takes Paul 2 years to become a leader. In that time he & Chani have a son that is killed by the Saudakar. The movie makes it seem like they just met, she doubts him & comes across like a jealous teenager. She's a warrior, she was critical in teaching & integrating Paul, they had a son together & suffered his loss together. No one knows Paul better than Chani & in the movie she loves him but doesn't trust or understand him. He has the weight of a world on his shoulders & agrees to marry Irulan to further their cause & Chani gets upset & storms off in a jealous fit like Paul is just trying to hook up with some random side chick. She is the primary reason why he even ascends & in the end of Dune 2 she's looking at him like he's a conman.
@@IronGiant2334 I know, and I think your critique is valid. It works for the book, but film is an entirely different medium where we can’t read their thoughts or see their motivations without actions, unless the movie uses exposition-dumps. I don’t see how it would be possible to show the audience that Paul is not a hero without a main character reflecting that feeling as well. If Chani acts like the book version; then the movie becomes the hero’s journey, and not a cautionary tale.
It's dubious to me whether or not a habitable planet would ever have a "black sun" or that said sunlight would make everything look monochromatic. They shot it with infrared cameras, but infrared is invisible to humans. HOWEVER: That doesn't matter. It was for effect, and it worked. Even if such a place couldn't literally exist, the unique look of the outdoor Giedi Prime scenes gives you the VIBE. It just FEELS different on that planet.
Having Dr. Kynes race and gender swapped and unconnected to Chani, really messes with Paul and Chani’s relationship-As Dr. Kynes, a Lawrence Of Arabia kind of figure, who was murdered by the Harkonnens, gives Paul and Chani something to bond over. The murder of both their fathers by the Harkonnens.
I think the change with Alia was terrible. Having a toddler with an adult personality would have been a great way of showcasing the weirdness of this universe and it was satisfying the Baron was killed by a child he tried to violate given the characters sickening nature. It had a poetic Justice to it that’s missing in the movie
I loved that change the most, and thought it captured the weirdness in a way, that didn't come off like chucky walking around. I dislike how it composed the timeline though.
I feel like Chani was always more than just a “love interest” in the books. And in the movie feel like the story was much more typical and what you would expect from any modern story. Also, all I see is Zendaya as the average or below average actress she is. Never saw the appeal.
The role isn’t great. The gave her more than it’s in the book. They tried to hype the female characters even gender swapping and making girls powerful to appeal to “modern” audiences.
@@lemonnade5974 when it’s done just to fill a quota or deliver some message yes. Dr Kynes should have never been a woman. It was never a woman in the book. He was gender swapped just for politics and wokeism.
This really should have been a tv series. Its crazy how a 3 hr movie felt so rushed n i didnt have a clue of the lore of the books. The more I'm learning about dune the more i dont see a path to where anybody will think the 3rd movie will be good as there's just way to much information they'd still need to cover unless they plan to go a TOTALLY different direction so much so they'd be creating a whole different story.
Not having Baron Harkonnen killed by a 2-year-old and fully prescient Alia was a smart choice as she was the cringiest part of the 1984 Dune movie. However, shortening the time Paul was with the Fremen from 2 years to 6 months and cutting out the first child he had with Chani being killed during the assault on Sietch Tabr was not. Paul's transformation from follower to leader doesn't feel as earned, and it lowered the emotional stakes of his duel with Fayed.
Some things I liked in the 1984 film they didn’t do here is Alia being real creepy and using the voice. Then, Paul using the voice on Lady Mohaim felt better in the old film
Herbert didn’t writer Messiah ‘to make his intentions known’ about the dangers of messianic leaders. The entire trilogy was intended from the outset to be read as a single comprehensive piece, with the perils of messianic fundamentalism serving as an overarching and guiding narrative for the larger saga. In fact, significant portions of Children and Messiah were written before Herbert finished Dune. It’s true that Messiah dives deeper into this theme, but that’s merely a function of that book’s place in the overall arc of the story.
My only issues with part 2 was the extreme speed run they gave us on the Gurney vs Rabban and the extensive religious scenes. I know they establish the fremen and what not but I think they could have pulled that off with 80% of the time they dedicated to it.
I felt of the three major changes (Alia, thuffir, the guilds involvement in the final scene) the guilds exclusion was the biggest disappointment. They could bring thuffir back in a cool way (gurney sieging geidi prime) and Alia could be developed still in part 3. With the focus on her as a fetus and her talking to Jessica, I thought Alia would take over her body in that final scene to shock the reverend mother. Maybe it’s just me but if Denis had been guaranteed multiple movies upfront the first book should have been a trilogy
I really wanted a trilogy , and works live to hear DV explain how he have done that. I was wondering where the three breaks would have come. Two seemed more natural for a movie being released one at a time.
Chani just felt cringy. Books make it obvious that Fremen have a polygamous lifestyle. There were maybe discussions between Lady Jessica and Chani to talk about Paul's need for a political alliance. By the end of it, Chani would not care she was only a concubine, hence the book ending made sense. It was clearly expected, especially for a royal figure. For the movie, they had to get rid of all of the previous buildup to illicit that ending. Plus, the Northern and Southern divide didn't make sense since the entire Fremen supported the Mahdi - Divisions didn't happen until Dune: Messiah. Aside from that, I can understand the other changes. All in all, it was a cinematic masterpiece 👌
Chani is brilliant in the film. She leaves because she doesn’t support Paul - that is the main reason. To be Paul’s equal she needs to be discerning. Book Chani lacks discernment.
@@SuperStella1111 If you have a 180-switch in her character arc, it's never a good sign. You essentially have to strip her foundations away just to make her more relevant to the current iteration. She was loyal in the book and this was never considered to be shameful. But, to create unnecessary drama, they did what they did, even though "discernment" is explored in Dune: Messiah with the rebellious Fremen. The Chani from the 2000 miniseries is far more accurate to the books, hence more enjoyable to watch.
Personally, I love the book but I think chani is easily the cringiest thing in it. This isn't exactly a response to you, so much as just my thoughts on it. It seems pretty gross and super dated that Paul basically comes to arrakis as a colonizer, then pulls up to the natives who treat him like Jesus, then starts hooking up with a character who literally just about worships him. Think about how unethical that power imbalance is lmao. You could say it's part of paul's character, but the creepiness of it all doesn't really fit thematically with what Dune is about, so why not just clean it up and change it? Plus I see Dune 1 chani as one of those things Herbert must have regretted, hence the changes that came later; I'm sure he would have been cool with it. But then we got people like toh768 here who miss a character who's defining personality trait, to them, is that "she was loyal... and this was never considered to be shameful." Ah yes, just what I look for in a romantic partner, someone so blinded by loyalty I can do just about anything I want, and they'll just be cool with it - like a little puppy. I loved the changes to Chani's character for the movie. It seemed like Chani had a way stronger sense of values that make sense to her given the way the culture of the fremen is established within the context of the movie. And, in the movie, Paul betrays her trust in a massive way, so she gets hurt and pissed. Without consulting or informing her, he decides to go drink a poison that's supposed to be certain death, then seems to (surprise!) actually die, then he does a complete 180 on what she thought they agreed on: that he wasn't down with the whole "I'm actually your god" thing (I get why but it'd still be a pretty big dick move from her perspective, right?). Early in pt. 2 he tells Jessica it's extremely messed up how she's manipulating the fremen. He and Chani saw eye to eye on that - until they didn't. So it's two massive, back-to-back betrayals! I think that hurt, concerned, and then pissed is how emotionally healthy, real people would respond to something like that. billybatts8283 said here "Chani came across as a... spoiled brat 20 year old from LA." Like -- what? I truly don't understand how someone could reach that conclusion based on what's in the movie. It's kind of giving... sexism? Now, I'm not saying that's you; your opinion is different from mine, but it makes sense. Did Zendaya's portrayal of Chani, or the writing of her character seem like a spoiled brat to you? Yeah it's different from the book, but it's been like 60 years since Dune was published, and I look back on certain things in the book as a product of the time. Also, it's almost impossible to make someone else's artistic vision reality, and do a good job. You ever see the movies that stephen king thinks are good adaptations of his books? or the one he made himself? They are very, very bad. That's a dude who can't let go of his own vision, so the stuff turns out terribly - like, sorry there's no stupid hedge monsters my guy, but the shining is a good movie. Anyway, movie Dune 1 and 2 are another look at Dune, in a slightly different font than the OG. I feel like we are crazy blessed that we got Denis of all people, with this budget no less, working on it. Dude frickin loves Dune - and so many bold choices. As you said, cinematic masterpiece.
@@billybatts8283 can’t agree. giving a character discernment and a moral centre makes them a better character. Book Chani just mindlessly worships him.
@@LuisSierra42agree with this in a big way. I'd love to get an extended cut similar to what we got with Lord of the Rings. As good as the theatrical cuts were, the extended editions were a significant improvement. The same could certainly be done with such a rich and dense story as Dune.
it only needs alterations for commercial purposes, and in Hollywood profit trumps art. That's why it makes the movie sloppy and irrational from the story development point of view. Villeveuve made a horrible job.
I really missed the Fremen’s terraforming agenda and also their entire Spice-culture. I believe the writers conflated the effects of Spice with the prophecy, and thus the Fremen skeptics must consider Water of Life to be “worm piss” that you are likely to die from drinking. Another important difference: Paul never trains the Fremen Fedaykin. They are supernemt badass without his involvement. Which then raises the question: why hadn’t they wiped out the Harkonnen already?
I agree abandoning the Thufir storyline in Dune Part 2 was disappointing and a missed opportunity to add depth to the House Atreides mythology… not to mention the further development of the Baron’s character, who is almost reduced to a pantomime villain in the second movie.
My biggest negative is the short timespan because trying to get me to belive Paul could become a native and go on to fight and win a war in under 9 months is pure bullshit and pulls me out of the movie big time
@@kyborgarner9762 yes and the BG training did nothing to prepare him for living in the deep desert and the fact that they fight and win over a super power in under 1 year is bullshit no matter what you say
even with all the changes the adaptation of the first book clocks to 6 hours. Tough I'd blame part 1 slow burn for not setting up some of the missing details.
Yeah part one really dragged in the beginning and didn’t world build very well. They were just using a bunch of dramatic shots with dramatic music to make everything feel weighty but you don’t really learn that much about the world these characters are operating in aside from the fact they are a very feudalistic society trying to take control of some resource lol. It seemed like tons of critical details were missing as I was watching it, and I hadn’t even read the books.
Villeneuve stated that he has mo interest in making a director's cut, explaining that everything that was cut was cut for a reason and is now dead to him or something along those lines :/
Chani’s performance was, by far, the weakest. The argument of using her as an object for communicating Herbert’s message on power falls apart when considering Denis turned Chani into a super soldier and expert thopter pilot rolled into one. This is all compounded by Zendaya’s lack of acting chops. She comes off as a pouty feminist with almost no romantic chemistry. Perhaps Denis was pandering to the woke academy for improved odds at the Oscars? Ending the film on her was a big mistake. The second crime of this film is turning Stilgar into an actual instant meme for mocking religious faith. Despite all of it, Paul’s excellent performance managed to outshine it all, redeeming the film in the process.
They still had to gave her a modern woman scene, when paul tries to mansplain something to her and she rolls her eyes and he stops..katherine kennedy should be proud
I disagree, I didn’t like Chalamet in that role, he’s too skinny and boyish, conveniently in the film he only wears still suits that don’t show his real scrawny shape.
Still wished that they acknowledged Chaim’s relation to Liet Chynes It would have been another avenue for her and Paul to bond over their lost parents, and also give more insight to her differing views from the southern fremen, with maybe her father instilling the “belief in fremen” while being from arakkis and liet believing in the prophecies (which is why Chani has her name) yet from another world
I think the only change I'm really disapointed with was Jessica's water of life scene. At the same time I can accept why it was condensed as it would be too challenging to bring all the details of it to screen. But man I really wanted to see Paul see the visions of him and Chani and Chani saying "always".
Beware charismatic leaders. This was a post hoc comment made by Herbert when he was feeling his popularity with young counter-culture readers and pandered to the "JFK is establishment" bandwagon. For anyone who has read the book and can think, his comment is related but not at all as revelatory as Denis has made it out to be, which has been commonly echoed recently.
Wish they would have shown why you don't fire a laser at a target with a shield, and disappointed there was no CHOAM or Navigators Guild representation, sure they show up more in Dune Messiah but I feel as though it will glossed over or just completely omitted =/
The movies sucked out 80% of the plotting and intrigue from the books. Hollywood bought a classic old book, designed a beautiful cover, sold the cover, and threw out the book.
I wish the _Dune_ story had been split into three parts, rather than two. the plot felt more and more rushed as _Part 2_ went on. …and then make _Messiah_ into the fourth movement to finish things off, like a symphony 👌 and while I liked the changes made with Alia, it might also been nice if Jessica had kilt the Baron, perhaps? and… perhaps they could change things around with the Fremen… where Jamis was Chani’s brother/cousin, and the Leto Jr. character melded with Jamis’ child that was also missing from the movie… 🤷🏻♂️
To be fair the plot felt even more rushed in the book than in the film haha. I do think there would have been more time to establish world building elements if the film was longer though.
yes, there is not alot of differences compared to lets say 1984 dune or the miniseries, but by the time alia is a young adult there were no seas in dune, just small patches of green in the desert here and there, by the time of leto the second , river and oasis and most of the planet is covered in green and the sandworms are a rare sight and about to go extinct and most of the spice comes from leto's massive stash and the isolated pockets of desert left intentionally by leto. if they introduce a sea in messiah it has to be because "magic" not ecological change. also kynes death is different, in the books he is left to die in the desert without a stillsuit hellucinating a dialogue with his father till he was killed by a spice blow. thufir parts were removed because the actor was sick.
Hawat serves another purpose: in the novel, right before he's captured, he's talking to a Fremen about the Sardukar. At that point in the story, we're aware of how feared the Sardukar are, but we still don't really know about the Fremen. It's in that scene when Hawat scoffs at them to just "capture one", and the Fremen says "yes.. we did... THREE OF THEM." I'm paraphrasing the scene, but it's one of my fav parts of the novel is just how DUMBSTRUCK Hawat is at the power of the Fremen. We never really see that in the movie. The win the final battle, it mostly seems, because of the worms. meh. Also, in the movie, Paul still uses the line "he who has the power to destroy a thing has the real control!" He deploys the atomics to the spice fields and then.... all the great houses just IGNORE HIM????? WTF?! Again, this is one of the most POWERFUL moments in the novel, when the two Guild Navigators are shook to their core at the realization that "he means it." But here... NOTHING HAPPENS!!! This is really the only thing I can't excuse in the movie. The fact the Emperor should look 35 and Walken looks every day of the 80 he is... all the other plot changes discussed in this video... I'm fine with all of it. But just walking away from "he who has the power to destroy a thing..."? No. It's a HUGE, GAPING hole in the plot.
I highly recommend watching Dune 2 if you're struggling to understand how we got to the holy war by Dune Messiah. The movie simplifies the sequence of events and makes more sense of the book’s story. In the film, the Lansraad doesn't acknowledge Paul. The Lansraad does not declare war either. Maybe the Lansraad was seeking an opportunity to negotiate a return to the status quo. Nonetheless, Paul instructs the Fremen to take the war to the galaxy to "make them believers" in forced acceptance of this new reality and conversion. This crucial detail makes the later events in other books much more understandable. By Children of Dune, the religion of Atreides exists across the galaxy. The book glossed over this, and I didn't understand in the book how others across the galaxy had grown to worship and fear the Atreides. If you want to fully appreciate the depth of possible futures that a Messiah movie could reveal in the Dune movie universe, watching Dune 2 is a must for newbies like me.
I agree, Paul would completely lose his credibility if he were not to follow through on his threat to destroy spice production. There is little point in being emperor if no one thinks you are willing to carry out your threats. The Lansraad would have accepted him if the only other option was the destruction of spice. I did really enjoy the movie, and these nitpicks didn't really diminish that. I also understand that this ending gives a better reason for the holy war happening. But book Paul would have carried out his threat against spice, and he would have never ordered himself the holy war.
The Lansraad are neutered by the Guild due to the threat to the spice, which they can confirm due to their own prescience. The house atomics have no bearing on the planetwide ecology of Arrakis, the atomics are no threat to the spice, just Paul's understanding of the relationship between the worms and the spice, and he knows how to kill all the worms, using a chemical reaction.
And chani being the love interest to paul is not a small role.Yes Paul married irulan for political reasons and she is trained in Bene Gesserit ways but she couldn't seduce paul and even have a more intimate relationship with him why?? Because Paul had chani as his true love, friend and advicer and chani is a simple fremen woman with no political side so Paul trusts her completely.sorry but I really don't understand why showing a good relationship is not appropriate in the movie.
Jessica is one of the best characters for me since the books, but the movies elevated her to a new level! Rebecca Ferguson was ABSOLUTE PERFECT, what a character!
The top and bottom of it is that the changes that were made were for dramatic effect and to facilitate a sequel that is easy for the average moviegoer to understand that book is pretty dense and convoluted for the average non sci-fi fan.
How come the films of dune take all of the character development and turn them into rote action sequences? It would be better to throw out all the melodramatics. No adequate presentation of nexus, no emphasis on the the significance of Paul's transformation, no presentation of the climax of the water of life other than some loose association with chani, no drama when paul confronts the emperor, riding the sandworms was literally as exciting as falling off a log, want me to go on? The best part of the whole two films was Gurney Halleck saying the Harkonnen are "BRUTAL!" Everythjng else was a rehash of the David Lynch version and not in a good way. Don't forget the David Lynch version had Talent, at least. The overemphasis on the sardaukar created confusion and distractable good versus evil cliche. I have to agree the mini series was the best presentation so far. The Villeneuve versions were "whitewashed" with implied significance and little else, IMHO, very little heros journey or transformation from childhood to adulthood other than "ta-da." Lady Jessica was the most developed character who developed into an extra by the end. Paul's triumph was like watching a Marvel superhero except one without explanation. Stilgar ended up coming across as a religious fanatic fool. Shadout Mapes was a charater who went nowhere. The Bene Gesserit were toothless boogeymen. What was the point of the ship arising out of the water? Perhaps, everything is indeed meaningless spectacle. Denis Villeneuve in overemphasizing modern realism diminished the science fiction fantasy. What remained was a confusing allegory of political, cultural Middle East conflict. But, to each his own. I confess, I fell asleep during the Feyd Rautha tourney. Where is the story, where is the drama, where is the conflict, where is the resolution? Explosions do little to bring out any of these elements of narration, or in the case of film: to show and not tell. whitewash 1.. to make something look better than it really is;
I didn’t read any Dune books, two parts of the movie is what I can talk about. Perhaps if u read the books u might not like these movies bc u now comparing the them to the books. Since I can only speak of the movies I found them interesting. Beautiful scenes, well made. I love the story, the cast. Can’t wait for part 3. 😊
What about the weirding way!!!! Paul didn't teach the Fremen any of it, and I was most excited to see how the director would translate it onscreen. It's a bummer because it's too late to be introduced in Messiah...smh
The biggest problem with having Alia yet unborn, is it accelerates the pace of Paul’s rise, in a way that was less believable than in the book. But on balance, it’s better because the oddness of an adult aware child Alia for the screen-It would’ve taken us out of the movie.
One thing i did not like is that Bene Geserit have gotten telepathic communication (not just a version of a sign language, that is imperceptable to others).
I see a lot of people praising the Chani changes. However, the bigger issue here is if she has left Paul by the end of the film, it can radically change how the sequel projects go, namely the eventual birth of the Twins and Leto II’s rise to become the God-Emperor of the Golden Path. I can admit that Chani in the book never seemed super important, and was more of a background character, but that does not change her eventual importance to the overall narrative. Unless the plan is to have them reconcile (which seems odd given how Paul will wage jihad for the next 10+ years, so if movie Chani has issues with Paul now, she will likely never get over it), or have Paul legitimize his marriage with Princess Irulan, which seems weird to me. The fact is, you can convey Paul’s spiral into a more villainous character without Chani. Showing his brutality, the right music, etc. can accomplish this (probably better than the book honestly, after reading the book I was confused as to how Herbert thought he was creating a cautionary tale through Paul as he never seemed to fully descend into tyranny in the first book). The Chani change felt weird and unnecessary.
Villeneuve completely destroyed characters and timelines. I wouldn't consider this an adaptation, it is mostly a movie based on the books. How can you say that Alia's character maintained the same relevance as in the books when in the books Alia is a way more relevant character who actually killed Baron Harkonnen being a full grown up at the age of 4? There's not even the tiniest resemblance to the character in the books. The same thing happens every time with Hollywood movies, since profiting is more important than any other artistic elements, all movies end up being the same trash. Lynch's adaptation was way better.
I think that this film did great with the limited time that had to tell this part of the story, after all dune is extense so missing content was expected and and that does not make it a worse way for telling the same story, just another way. With that said. I would love an extended/special edition that covers most of the cutted content that doesn't contradicts what was showed in the movie. One can only dream
I'm searching of the source of this information : where Herbert said or write that he wrote the Messiah of Dune to prévention people to see Pau as à hero ? Never heard that before ...
The book is so different from both movies, Kyle and Sean’s relationship nearly nailed it, but Tim and Zendaya are vastly different and far from the Book.
Herbert did not criticize "messiahs" paul is just not the messiah , hes the voice in the wilderness , or your john the baptist figure. Herbert criticized religion , and painstakingly gave you a piece of every world religion , in the spacing guild bene gesserit , fremen triangle.
my understanding is that she takes a worm, for a reason, to go back south, to go to get the water of life, to threaten to poison the worms and destroy the spice, in order to make paul step out of the lie and stop being evil
I breakdown the biggest differences between the Dune Part 2 movie and Frank Herbert's book. There are a few other changes mentioned in my 'Explained' and 'Biggest Questions' videos that I posted last week, so I'd recommend checking out those uploads on my channel too. But what differences did you pick out in the film and what was your overall impressions of the changes made?
What is a spice orgy?
@@LuisSierra42 great question
@@LuisSierra42think of it like the scene in The Matrix Revolutions(I think?) where everyone on Zion was celebrating and the camera slowed down showing everyone dancing erotically. Now add spice and an orgy.
@@ugoeze7360 Ah, you mean the rave scene in Matrix Reloaded. If we are talking about an actual orgy, then that's why it was cut, the movie needed a PG13 rating
Great breakdown!
You're the first reviewer I've seen mention the positive change to the attack on Sietch Tabr (and the removal of Leto II). It's something I think a lot of people missed, but it greatly improves upon the book. It really makes it seem like Paul's hand is forced and he has to reluctantly accept his terrible purpose and go south to drink the water of life. It also gives greater reasoning behind the final battle, and allows for build-up to the final battle, where in the book Paul just sees that the great houses are already there, and immediately attacks, and then the attack on Sietch Tabr happens offscreen. It's much less impactful in the book.
Another big change is the amount of Fremen that join Paul. In the book it's a bit unclear but it seems like it's just Paul's Fedaykin from Sietch Tabr who participate in the final battle, and the scene where Paul decides not to kill Stilgar only happens in front of a small group of Fremen. There's also no Great War council in the book (although it's mentioned a couple councillors showed up, but they're not really mentioned), so there's no feeling like Paul has united all of the Fremen on the planet.
In my opinion the confrontation between Gurney and Jessica in the book was pointless, as it had literally no consequence and any tension that was created was immediately resolved in a single conversation, and then it was as if nothing happened. But it is true that it may have been good foreshadowing for the following book.
I feel the same way about Thufir Hawat, as we don't even see him in part 2 of the book (just hear about him from others) and when he does show up he immediately dies. But it would have been good world building to see Thufir's training with Paul.
And the changes to Chani made a whole lot of sense to me, their connection seems genuine as Chani is literally the only person wo Paul knows who isn't a worshipper following a false prophecy (like the Fremen), a follower (like Gurney), trying to manipulate him (Jessica), or trying to kill him (everyone else). She's the only one who sees things the same way as Paul, so it makes sense that Paul would love her. He wouldn't want to be with a worshipper.
Another thing not mentioned here is that in the book the dream of turning Arrakis into a paradise is the idea of Liet Kynes' father, an offworlder. In the film, it's presented as an ancient prophecy, which I feel gives it more weight, and aligns with the Fremen's self-sufficiency and distrust of offworlders.
I feel like the changes to Chani make her a Victim.
In the movie, she was forced against her will to help Paul via the Voice & Paul just "took" the Hand of Irulan.
In the Book, Chani choose to help Paul and even convinved him that a marriage to Irulan is a good thing.
❤
Agreed, in the movie she's just pouty and decides not to trust Paul
Yeah but that seriously won't sell in today's cinemas
The last scene in the movie was so much of a polar opposite from the ending of the book that it killed all emotion I was feeling. I don't understand how people can say it's not a big change at all. In the next movie they'll either adapt Dune Messiah faithfully, making the change meaningless in the first place, or completely rewrite Paul and Chani's relationship making it even more of a mess.
@@Agustin_Leal I haven't read the book, but watched the movie. I'm very interested in the differences if you care to elaborate!
My only complaint really is that Jessica threw up. Her Bene Gesserit training gives her full control of her own body, it would literally be the last thing she would do.
I despise most of the complaints I’m reading here but you’ve got a solid point there brother.
It’s to remind viewers who watched Dune I that she’s pregnant. And it gives Stilgar a chance to reinforce: “water is the only thing that matters.” But yeah. I hated it too.
@@brandongrundmeyer7793I loved the entire film except the part after the battle where gurney and the fremen are burning bodies. After the film established that no water is wasted even from the dead
Hmmm, now that you mention it it was out of character and clunky, honestly I thought it was mostly morning sickness.
@@miguelvelasco4212 It was Harkonnens bodies, their ''water'' is toxic.
One of the biggest changes I noticed , which no one has acknowledged in the videos I’ve watched, was the elimination of Janis’s wife and kids from the equation. I was ok with it, because it helped showcase the more compelling love story between Chani and Paul.
After making the video and posting it, I literally remembered everything with Harah and was so bummed I forgot to include it. I feel the same as you do about that.
Agreed on both points. I'm not sure how audiences would have received that.
I think at least in having Jamis' children inherited by Paul, with Harah having died long ago and/or having more of a group of surrogate mothers taking care of them, would have made for a much more compelling induction of Paul into fremen culture. He basically just falls into a role of cultural and religious leader in a matter of a few months and there's not much friction in the process on a relationship basis. Really flattens a lot of the characters and also fremen culture - a culture that is the way it is for a reason
@@zelgkopitar8799 maybe I don't know enough about Liet, but I didn't see much of an issue with the change tbh. I'm just upset they dropped his (her) entire relevance in Part 2. So much that was built up in Part 1 was just forgotten in Part 2. It makes me sad because I found Part 1 really well done even though there were obvious omissions
You are absolutely wrong about that. In the book, Harah indeed physically offered herself to Paul, saying she was older, but still attractive and of value. And Paul demonstrated how much he loved Chani, by politely rejecting her. You are absolutely 180 degrees 100% wrong.
I would mention 3 more differences:
1 - Jessica was made in the film a much more proactive force in making Paul the Muad’dib. In the book she doesn’t know he’s about to drink the water of life and in the movie she basically orchestrates it.
2 - The scene where Gurney meets Paul again is massively underplayed in the movie. In the book it’s a really touching scene (having known all that time that Gurney is with the smugglers) and it has some great quotes that weren’t used in the movie (Paul saying to him “here some of the things you’re not meant to see”).
3 - Stilgar was kinda made into a caricature in the movie. In the book Paul is indeed worried that he’s turning from a friend to a follower but in the movie his belief in the Paul/Lisan Al Gaib prophecy is completely taking over the character, stripping him of his leadership aspect. Javier Bardem is great though, really loved his performance.
The third point you made is so true. The second film literally turned Stilgar into a meme.
I totally agree with the stilgar point. literally makes me so sad
About #3, as we all know, a movie doesn’t have the luxury of time and space to convey a message that a book has. Stilgar was used as a figurehead for the believers of the prophecy and his leadership must be blunted to enhance Paul’s own ascendancy to leadership. (Chani represents the sceptical faction.)
@@JaimeLessainsI respectfully disagree. There are plenty of characters in the movie who are loyal followers of others without losing their own gravity as an authority figure. Stilgar could have been written to believe in the prophecy without becoming such a sycophant to Paul. Having Stilgar retain his gravitas would have enhanced the cautionary aspect, not weakened it. As it would have shown that even very strong men can fall victim to religious fairy tales.
@@JaimeLessains They should have never had the anti prophecy faction. That's what forced Stilgar into the box of being a super religious guy that instantly believes in the Muad dib. And they also make him less of a leader. he has to ask some council in his sietch, permission to allow jessica and paul to live there. Anyway it never feels like he's radicalizing in the book. He's a hardcore believer from the start. The book stilgar believes, but he doesn't necessarily believe in Paul the moment they meet. Only after Paul fits the prophecy and does some miracelous stuff does Stilgar slowly turn more and more radical. Esp after Paul starts to change their way of life to suit his goals better (e.g. not challenging Stilgar because he wants Stilgar as one of his men)
But noooo .. They had to have Chani be too cool to school
the changes left a bad enough taste in my mouth to pretty much sour part 2. north and south, evil jessica, completely different chani, comic relief stilgar, no spacing guild, no dinner party, no real exploration of who the fremen were other than being ‘arab muslims’, i didn’t feel just how valuable water actually is there. personally i didn’t much care for zendaya performance either.
i like part 1 for the most part and i really wanted to like part 2 but some of the changes fundamentally altered some of the things i loved so much about the novel.
I'm massively disappointed they didn't show Paul using the voice against the Sardaukar. That was a really badass part in the book
Yes. They took away his strength in this version
And this was so much of what made the entire idea so cool to me. That's a Bene Gesserit voice, a Bene Gesserit invention that is being used in a way unpredicted by them. It's ironic.
Yeah, he really almost never used the voice at all. I can only recall one scene in the second movie
Yeah the lack of the voice was very telling of how rushed this movie was. But even still, they could have done a much more efficient job of incorporating book elements into this film. Disappointing.
@@do_it_for_content I feel this could have been a 12 episode high budget limited series. I'm re-reading the book and there is SO much stuff they excised, especially having to do with Mentats. In the movie we hardly have a clue what Thufir does or even what his name is. In the book he's clearly responsible for the entire family's security and he "struck fear into the heart of the emperor himself." A major aspect of the Harkonnen plotting against House Atreides was figuring out how to compromise Thufir's functioning as a mentat, because he is so good. The idea that there are people with elevated mental training instead of computers was generally underemphasized in the movie. Entire episodes could have been dedicated to the chess game that happens between Harkonnens and Atreides in the first third of the book, with thd Atreides knowing of an ambush but miscalculating where it's coming from, and why.
I think that reducing the time scale (to less than 9 months) takes away the incredible effort that it took for Paul to regain control of Arrakis. It seemed all too easy (learning the Fremen customs and language, organizing militias, disrupting trade, spreading the myth of the messiah, etc.).
I agree. As someone that has a lot of complaints about the movie though. I do kinda get why. Because they couldn't do Alia.. how are you going to have a 2 year old todler talking and acting like an adult? Even killing people. If they had a broader time scale then Alia would have to be included. But honestly, they could just have kept Alia a baby that telephatically communicated with Jessica and still have more time passing than less than 9 months
@@3choblast3r4 she was 4 years old when she killed the harkonnens
I think the removal of the space guild severely changes the world of Dune and the stakes of the story. Without any context as to how crucial spice is to the functioning of the commerce and governance of the worlds it is reduced to a simple resource to fight over like oil in the Middle East. We really never get to see how the choking of spice affects the key parties and leads inevitably to the conclusion of the film, drawing them all to Arrakis for the climax. The role of the Guild in the betrayal of House Atreides and their eventually having to flip to Paul's side to preserve their supply of spice I see as crucial to a full understanding of the weight of the events on Arrakis to the whole Empire.
The space guild is mentioned numerous times in the movies
They are barely mentioned in the first book. Basically no detailed info given about them. Don’t understand why people keep whinging about them not being in the film.
@@greywildgreen they also literally are in the movie idk what people are talking about. I watched the movie before reading the book and I was well aware of who they were
@@hankolson3845 It’s like people expect all the world building from all 23 books to be in these two movies when the movies only cover one book.
I think it’s better to tackle that in part 3, when the issue is already at hand and the plot against Paul is a central plot point.
The other main benefit of the lack of a significant time jump is (from a cinematic point of view) it helps illustrate Stilgar and the other Fremen factions' religious fanaticism toward Paul, owing to it happening over a shorter period of time.
One thing I noticed visually with Paul ending the Baron is that while he used his crysknife, not a gom jabbar, the method was the same as a gom jabbar, even to the reference of treating his body as less than an animal.
Knives are better. I loved that change.
The usage of the Gom Jabbar was to reduce him to an animal, which killing him with a crysknife doesn't.
Didn’t I teach you rookie, knives are faster.
@@SuperStella1111 Eh, it was ok. It was much cooler when he stabbed the knife under Feyd's chin during their fight. Also didn't like that Feyd fought fair and that he stabbed Paul twice very deeply.
15:30 First movie once mentioned Landsraad by name, when they asked dr Kynes if she is willing to testify.
I think a blind priest would have followed Lea Seydoux into her room.
Old married man here: yes.
I was surprised Jessica didn't give birth in the movie, but then again having a 2 year spice child prophet fighting has a good chance of looking pretty silly in a movie.
I was wondering how they were going to pull off the talking baby. It worked in the book, but I count figure it his they'd do it in the film .
This is my favorite change from the book to the movie. I loved that.
@@GC3-4370 yeah I liked it in the book, but it would have looked goofy as hell in the movie.
but she was 4 years old at the end of the book
@@ryanmacharika3946 2 or 4 doesn't really matter that much lol
Yea, you can’t have a toddler killing Sardukar and the Baron. It looked ridiculous in the ‘84 movie and would be even worse in this adaptation.
I’ve seen the film four times so far
Wow!
Watched it twice and next week going to cinema for third time 😊
Nice man I'm going again today
Got my ticket to watch it again in 4dx
Two for me.
Tyvm for your insightful critique. I read the books every year for decades, each time noticing another detail of the story or another impactful line. I was so disappointed by D. Lynch adaptation and loved D. Villeneuve's fidelity to the intent of F. Herbert's work. I will be watching it next week and come fully prepared to changes and looking forward to the poetry that movies can bring. I hope it encourages many younger viewers to read the novels and learn from the depth of F. Herbert's vision.
Can't wait to hear your opinion of the movie after you've seen it. The vision has changed dramatically.
@@SageWon-1aussie Loved the adaptation: faithful to the saga and underlying message, satisfying to the readers and enjoyable to those new to the story. The visual, the sound track, the acting, the tasteful special effects were great. Glad a lot of the 'words' became camera, light, angles, colours, facial expressions and implied. It's a layered movie that those in the know will grasp the subtleties of and others might sense. It's intelligent for an audience allowed to know, ignore or get informed. Looking forward to how D. Villeneuve will handle the next part... and viewers surprises at where Paul is leading the empire, how and why.
@@isiseungella4688 When you said next week, I didn't realise you meant in the next ten hours.
This does not describe my experience at all, but then I really liked the depth of the book.
Glad you liked the movie, hopefully it will encourage people to grapple with the complexities of the book heya.
@SageWon-1aussie 5 days apart, different week. I wasn't sure which day of that following week we could drive to town. I don't live in a big city. There's is 1 cinema for the whole town.
Sorry, but the DV version is far less daring and interesting than the 1984 version. DV seems to want to make a bland, predictable, long winded turd movies. Part 2 just kept going and going and going...so boring. I did like the spice harvesters in the DV version, that was excellent....the rest, like the story telling, just bad.
Chani changes didn’t feel needed…I read the book in between watching part one and part two and really didn’t like the changes to her character
When Paul took the water of life a great scene would have been Paul seeing the original Atreides declaration that the Harkonnens were cowards.
I don’t think anyone will care but in my opinion Dune part 1 was a bloody brilliant film AND adaptation of the book. Part 2 was simply a good film - a very good one ofc - but it wasn’t such a good adaptation. In fact it deviates quite drastically by the end. But because I read the books before watching the films it didn’t seem to be the “greatest movie ever” like some have claimed. If you never read the books it would feel like that because of excellent writing and SFX
I wanted to see more of Paul training the Fremen. I wanted to see Paul moving with enhanced speed. I wanted the Third Stage Navigator "Paul must be killed" scene. I wanted Paul to show more of his powers. After the fight with Feyd, I wanted Paul to split his body with the Voice. And I really didn't like Chani being pissed off.
I fully agree
You forgot two major points.
Paul learnt how to manipulate the spice molecule and destroy all spice. That’s how he threaten the emperor, not with the atomic but with spice molecule manipulation.
The tip of Freud’s knife was poisoned and Paul adjusted his body to this when Freud thought he had Paul, Paul then adjusted the poison and killed him.
exactly
I appreciate the blue with blue eye effects in this film. More realistic than the previous versions.
Yeah, like why didn’t they have that technology back in 84 right?
@@Hudpix16 in old film the and TV series it almost like the people had laser eyes 😆😆 like had light bulbs for eyes.
No, it was just as poor.
It wasn't enough for me. 90% of the time you can't even tell they're not supposed to be white.
Alia Atradies got robbed! I hope she gets justice in Messiah.
Great job summarizing the key changes. Those were the main ones I noticed. Hawat being removed made logical sense because I never bought into the idea of the Baron being stupid enough to bring a loyal member of Leto’s inner circle as his advisor. I also felt a big flaw in the book Dune was Paul having three male advisors that all started to blend together, so I understand why his presence in the first movie was lessened. However, it led to another problem I had with Dune 2 in that there were less Baron scenes and his menace as a threat was lessened compared to the book. His book scenes with how he subjugated Hawat increased his menace and cruelty.
I can't stand faux girl power Chani. It's a step too far from her character in the book. It kind of ruined part two for me. That and the absence of the spice guild.
Blade Runner 2049 is by far a better movie than the Dune adaptations. If you read the books it's just too much to ever squeeze into a movie format and serve the story correctly.
The biggest problem i had with the changes to Chani's character, is that i see her character was always as loyal to Paul as he was to her, and this movie sort of ends on a sour note as far as their relationship, and that me sad as far as the "end of a book" goes. Her primary characteristic, is thus betrayed, even though adding this side of strength and independence to her makes her a deeper more interesting character, i don't think it serves her part in the story.
I absolutley loved how they changed her character. She became a reminder to the audience that Paul is a fabricated Messiah, and that sort of helps transmit Herbert's critique to the Messieh idea and culture around it
Let’s face it, it’s because of Zendaya and modern film. The book is much better - so frustrating.
This is the Thematic adaptation of Dune. And in order to portray the themes most effectively on screen, changes are necessary. Every great adaptation that captures the themes of the source contains such necessary changes, because literature and cinema are so inherently different.
The various adaptations all approach the source novel with different motivations, and as such, can complement and supplement one another quite well. The Lynch film, for what it's worth, captured the weirdness of Dune, the miniseries is very much the Story adaptation, and Villenueve is giving us a visually spectacular take on the themes of Dune, while also staying *mostly* true to the events of the book. So far, I'm absolutely loving it, and looking forward to Messiah.
Couldn't agree more
This movie has almost nothing from the book in it. The narrative portrayed in this movie was firmly rejected by Paul on the day Leto died in the book Herbert wrote.
Hollywood hack or shill for Hollywood hack... What's your preferred title?
Denis did not include the Weirding Way. The style of fighting that made the Fremen a force to be reckoned with.
Drink water of life. Turns you into an instant asshole. That was another change. Also, when the rev mother called Paul "Abomination" That made no sense.
I do wish that the knife fight in the end was better. In the book it was much more complicated; in the movie I can't even see how Paul actually kills Feyd...
On Gurney/Jessica: Nobody seems to have picked up on a huge difference in Dune 1: In the book, the first part is like a Hitchcock psycho thriller. In the second book scene, the baron reveals his plan, the traitor and every detail including that he wants all advisors of Leto to believe that Jessica is the traitor. In the film, the first part looks similar to the book, but is told in a totally different style. We don’t know about the traitor and Jessica is never suspected. I assumed it’s because the psycho thriller style was too different from the epic adventure style used later.
The movies didn't include any back story for Gurney Halleck, which weakened him as a character.
I was disappointed they didnt talk about folding space with the spice, like they did in David Lynch's version..that would have been cool to see Deni's take on that..but maybe it was left out because he probably couldnt put it in the film to make sense how a spice can distort space to move from one galaxy to the next..who knows
We saw how space travel works in part one, although we didn't see the whole process or logic behind it. The Guild Heighliner is what folds space. The Guild Navigators just trace safe paths between the stars, with the help of lots of spice.
Hopefully they'll talk about it Dune: messiah where Paul is going to be emperor. Spice a very important part of the Empire and politic power in this universe.
If I remember correctly you actually can see space folded as there is a planet on the other side of the guild highliner when reverand mother mohiam visits Caladan in part one.
@@wonderoguenow I'll have to go back and look for that!
The lack of the spacing guild in part 2 was the only disappointment for me. I enjoy everything space travel related when it comes to sci fi so I was hoping for a more advanced depiction of what the navigators do to deliver travel and for me in the end this is the only thing that slightly disconnects this movie from being the sci fi drama I feel it should be. All in all it’s not as important as the many other things Dennie focused on and doesn’t hurt the story at all so there you have it. That’s probably why it was omitted. Wonderful video as always Cortex. Thank you
All the changes in this movie are justified. Hate to admit it but the novel had narrative issues and this movie streamlined the story. I'm sure if Frank Herbert wrote the novel in a traditional way, the story would have been closer to what you see in this movie.
I mostly agree. And Denis ended the film with the message that herbert wanted to get across to the reader. Most of the changes serve getting to that ending message
@CortexVideos Agreed. That's exactly what I got from it too. Many readers forget that the first Dune novel was actually written as magazine serials so that's why so many characters, mythology elements, and plot points were introduced. Herbert did all of that to keep each entry of the serial interesting!
I get the impression that Denis seems to have understood this very well.
I would agree more if Villeneuve made the decisions about how to retell the story first, and then decided on how many movies he will need to do it properly. Sadly, that is not the case, and all of the changes stem from the decision to cram the story into two movies, instead of three. He had to invent new motivations to progress things faster. The first movie had a great pacing, this one feels very rushed. I enjoyed the movie but I think it is greatly compromised, and had he been able to make two more movies, Villeneuve would have made both of them significantly better than this one.
The movie misses alot of themes. Movie is good. Book is best. I'm not even a big book reader. I read it like 4 years ago. When the first dune trailer came out. The movie cut out lots of things. And added bunch of stupid crap. Paul n his family aren't the good guys. Yes herkonens are monsters. But atreides aren't the good guys. The movie didn't detail the importance of spice. Mentats are no where to be found in the 2nd movie. The trees are looked at with envy. They are not scared. And more. It affects the theme of dune.
Nope. That is your opinion. Rationalizing DV's bad storytelling. Stop it. Seek help
My opinion is : l don’t care if the movie scenes match with the book or not .
I enjoyed watching it without comparing with the book .
It’s a great movie which has been made with a great director and I will be watching dune2 many times until the next part .
I couldn't agree more. As look at it captyres the spirit, the characters and the main story and then i can't ask for more. Especially with a book as dense and difficult to adapt as dune is
@@CortexVideos
Indeed .
I watched it immediately after re-reading the book and directly comparing it to the book, and even I think it was an amazing adaptation. There are things that were changed that were improvements upon the book even.
My dude, without the book there is no movie. It’s not possible to separate them even if you wanted to…Frank Herbert felt that he made a mistake in the way he wrote Paul. The character was intended to be seen as an anti-hero rather than idolized by the audience. In that way, the film does a nice job of using Chani to highlight this more nuanced depiction of Paul.
I don’t mind the changes because it just makes the book sound more interesting when you describe it to those who only saw the movie and enjoyed it
Everyone keeps saying chani was just his love interest , i would ask what book you read , she was a strong fighter who met challenges in his stead , they were the love story and the solid connection to pauls world , the book showed the strong relationship in the face of political obligation , "those called concubine history will call , wives",-Chani, Dune
I felt like the relationship in the book was hollow - there's a bit of flirting early on but it seems just physical, and then she treats him pretty much the same way as all the other Fremen, as the chosen one.
I like how in the film Chani is the only one to see things the same way as Paul - it makes a lot more sense why he would want to be with her, she's his conscience and the only person not worshipping him because of a false prophecy.
@@tb45g what false prophecy!? He IS the guy he claims to be , there is the biggest problem , hes not a "false profit" the nuns are mad at Jessica for having him early. He IS the voice from the outer world they speak of he was PLANNED by the sisterhood. Not a "false" anything.
@@rainjones3212 Exactly, he was planned, not prophesied. The Bene Gesserit aren't religious.
The "prophecy" is a made-up religion that exists in different forms all over the galaxy in order to support the rise of a Kwizatz Haderach, and support the Bene Gesserit's plans and protect them. It's purposefully open-ended so as to accommodate the many ways the Bene Gesserit could enact their plan. But most of the things that are part of the prophecy are simply things the Bene Gesserit are trained to do (and things the Spacing Guild can do). And they are trained to take advantage of the myths planted by them in previous generations.
But the Bene Gesserit don't believe in destiny or religion, they simply planted those superstitions in order to eventually take control. They didn't believe a Kwizatz Haderach would come, rather they planned to create one. But he could have just as easily have appeared on Geidi Prime as on Arrakis. It's not some magical or mystical thing, it's just the end result of the Bene Gesserit's program.
@@rainjones3212 The Quizac Haderach is a real thing, and Paul turns out to be it, but Lisan Al Gaib (the voice from the outer world) is just a story the BG planted to aid their own, should they ever find themselves in a pickle on this godforsaken planet (and they did this everywhere they went, to cover all bets). It's a tool to rally the locals and obtain their help. The BG never planned for Paul to land there, take leadership of the Fremen, use them to take over the entire empire and, ultimately, cripple their realm of influence. They wanted to create a superhuman they could control, but accidentally created a living god who turned all of their meticulous millennia-long scheming against them. For the Fremen like Chani, who could see through the entire enterprise, he was a false prophet because there was never any prophet to begin with, not because Paul wasn't it.
@@rainjones3212 its not a prophecy, its set up to be a prophecy. All the tests they had to do were trained by the bene geneserit as a way to protect them if they to come undeer danger on the planet. Paul was a product of bene gessirit breeding scheme to produce a human who can bridge time and space. There was nothing mystical about it, it was all science and all pre planned
Change to Chani is the most important. Book Chani is too go-with-the-flow. Film Chani is discerning, clear-eyed: she is Paul’s equal and sees through him. It makes their connection deeper and she is a better character.
Would have been nice to see some scenes where they disagree more. From what I remember in the movie they don’t talk at all about the direction he is leading them.
Yes because in order to have a strong female character, She has to act like a girl boss from the year 2024. Only women with a modern western mindset are truly empowered.. And interesting.. right?
@@samuelgonzalez1392did you even watch the film? How is she a girl boss??? lmao
@@samuelgonzalez1392 she’s not a girlboss. At all.
@@samuelgonzalez1392 and for the record: book Chani knows how to kill.
I believe the changes proved beneficial sure a few more minutes would have been even better but with this I am more than happy. I love this film to pieces
Yeah, the ending could have used more attention.
I loved the film and think the changes were not too bad. I do hate that they cut Thufir Hawat from the movie as he wasn't given much in the first movie. Having Chani be the voice of reason was a great change but it does pose the question as to how Denis Villeneuve will be able to bring her an Paul back together for the third movie as them being together is important for the plot of the Dune Messiah.
It would have been cool to see Thufir more, but I definitely understand why he was cut. He doesn't have any POV scenes in the second half of the book and he's not even present for any scenes either until the end where he just dies. I really just wish they'd added more scenes with him training Paul in the first film.
Women get mad all the time. Once she’s calmed down, Paul will have make up sex with her and everything will be fine again.
My issue on the Chani change was mostly that it felt partially like it would have been VERY important for them to have had some on screen dialog where he explains (to some extent) what/how things are going to go down. She could still reject that in the short term and not mess up the story (I mean, it's a LOT to take in). But... we don't get that, which makes it feel kind of like they just didn't use their words... Maybe they did off screen, but what we got felt like he blindsided her quite a bit more than it seems like would be reasonable. Like... there's a STRONG reason why it's going to go the direction it does.
If they didn't spent so much time on large, spectacle scenes that usually made no sense they could have added a lot more of the content you mentioned and made a much better movie.
Lynch's depiction of Alia wasn't silly, it was just faithful to the book. As far as adding the Northern v Southern Fremen conflict and the changes to Chani, 'interesting' and 'relatable' is code for secularizing the story for a modern audience.
"is code for secularizing the story for a modern audience" When Dune was released most westerners knew very little of the arabic culture Dune portrayed. They know rather more of it now due to blobalization and conflicts that affect them. There is no need to patronize a modern audience.
@@archvaldorand yet this movie does patronize the audience by deleting any reference to Jihad
If you don't think a toddler fighting adults is silly it's because you're ridiculous 😂
"Weirding modules"? Rain on Arrakis? Sorry, the Lynch movie is a horrific adaptation.
Chani changes i really didn’t like
As someone who watched the movies first, I found chani EXTREMELY boring in the book.
She literally has no personality
Without her, Paul would look like a messiah and not a manufactured prophet, which defeats the point of the story. She is a stand-in for the audience.
@@hankolson3845Agreed.
In the book it takes Paul 2 years to become a leader. In that time he & Chani have a son that is killed by the Saudakar. The movie makes it seem like they just met, she doubts him & comes across like a jealous teenager. She's a warrior, she was critical in teaching & integrating Paul, they had a son together & suffered his loss together. No one knows Paul better than Chani & in the movie she loves him but doesn't trust or understand him. He has the weight of a world on his shoulders & agrees to marry Irulan to further their cause & Chani gets upset & storms off in a jealous fit like Paul is just trying to hook up with some random side chick. She is the primary reason why he even ascends & in the end of Dune 2 she's looking at him like he's a conman.
@@IronGiant2334 I know, and I think your critique is valid. It works for the book, but film is an entirely different medium where we can’t read their thoughts or see their motivations without actions, unless the movie uses exposition-dumps. I don’t see how it would be possible to show the audience that Paul is not a hero without a main character reflecting that feeling as well. If Chani acts like the book version; then the movie becomes the hero’s journey, and not a cautionary tale.
It's dubious to me whether or not a habitable planet would ever have a "black sun" or that said sunlight would make everything look monochromatic. They shot it with infrared cameras, but infrared is invisible to humans. HOWEVER: That doesn't matter. It was for effect, and it worked. Even if such a place couldn't literally exist, the unique look of the outdoor Giedi Prime scenes gives you the VIBE. It just FEELS different on that planet.
Leaving out the navigator guild was a terrible choice -- but I'll withhold final judgement, hoping they play a big role in part 3.
Having Dr. Kynes race and gender swapped and unconnected to Chani, really messes with Paul and Chani’s relationship-As Dr. Kynes, a Lawrence Of Arabia kind of figure, who was murdered by the Harkonnens, gives Paul and Chani something to bond over.
The murder of both their fathers by the Harkonnens.
I think the change with Alia was terrible. Having a toddler with an adult personality would have been a great way of showcasing the weirdness of this universe and it was satisfying the Baron was killed by a child he tried to violate given the characters sickening nature. It had a poetic Justice to it that’s missing in the movie
I loved that change the most, and thought it captured the weirdness in a way, that didn't come off like chucky walking around. I dislike how it composed the timeline though.
I feel like Chani was always more than just a “love interest” in the books. And in the movie feel like the story was much more typical and what you would expect from any modern story. Also, all I see is Zendaya as the average or below average actress she is. Never saw the appeal.
I have to give love to Florence Pugh she played her part well when initially i thought she’d be a bad fit.
There's nothing she isn't good in.
The role isn’t great. The gave her more than it’s in the book. They tried to hype the female characters even gender swapping and making girls powerful to appeal to “modern” audiences.
@@Hudpix16does the prominence of female characters upset you? Genuine question
@@lemonnade5974 when it’s done just to fill a quota or deliver some message yes. Dr Kynes should have never been a woman. It was never a woman in the book. He was gender swapped just for politics and wokeism.
This really should have been a tv series. Its crazy how a 3 hr movie felt so rushed n i didnt have a clue of the lore of the books. The more I'm learning about dune the more i dont see a path to where anybody will think the 3rd movie will be good as there's just way to much information they'd still need to cover unless they plan to go a TOTALLY different direction so much so they'd be creating a whole different story.
Not having Baron Harkonnen killed by a 2-year-old and fully prescient Alia was a smart choice as she was the cringiest part of the 1984 Dune movie. However, shortening the time Paul was with the Fremen from 2 years to 6 months and cutting out the first child he had with Chani being killed during the assault on Sietch Tabr was not. Paul's transformation from follower to leader doesn't feel as earned, and it lowered the emotional stakes of his duel with Fayed.
Alia talking in from the womb? Ridiculous! They also downplayed Paul and Chani's relationship. I disagree with you.
Some things I liked in the 1984 film they didn’t do here is Alia being real creepy and using the voice. Then, Paul using the voice on Lady Mohaim felt better in the old film
Herbert didn’t writer Messiah ‘to make his intentions known’ about the dangers of messianic leaders.
The entire trilogy was intended from the outset to be read as a single comprehensive piece, with the perils of messianic fundamentalism serving as an overarching and guiding narrative for the larger saga. In fact, significant portions of Children and Messiah were written before Herbert finished Dune.
It’s true that Messiah dives deeper into this theme, but that’s merely a function of that book’s place in the overall arc of the story.
My only issues with part 2 was the extreme speed run they gave us on the Gurney vs Rabban and the extensive religious scenes. I know they establish the fremen and what not but I think they could have pulled that off with 80% of the time they dedicated to it.
I felt of the three major changes (Alia, thuffir, the guilds involvement in the final scene) the guilds exclusion was the biggest disappointment. They could bring thuffir back in a cool way (gurney sieging geidi prime) and Alia could be developed still in part 3. With the focus on her as a fetus and her talking to Jessica, I thought Alia would take over her body in that final scene to shock the reverend mother. Maybe it’s just me but if Denis had been guaranteed multiple movies upfront the first book should have been a trilogy
I really wanted a trilogy , and works live to hear DV explain how he have done that. I was wondering where the three breaks would have come. Two seemed more natural for a movie being released one at a time.
Chani just felt cringy. Books make it obvious that Fremen have a polygamous lifestyle. There were maybe discussions between Lady Jessica and Chani to talk about Paul's need for a political alliance. By the end of it, Chani would not care she was only a concubine, hence the book ending made sense. It was clearly expected, especially for a royal figure. For the movie, they had to get rid of all of the previous buildup to illicit that ending. Plus, the Northern and Southern divide didn't make sense since the entire Fremen supported the Mahdi - Divisions didn't happen until Dune: Messiah.
Aside from that, I can understand the other changes. All in all, it was a cinematic masterpiece 👌
Chani is brilliant in the film. She leaves because she doesn’t support Paul - that is the main reason. To be Paul’s equal she needs to be discerning. Book Chani lacks discernment.
@@SuperStella1111 If you have a 180-switch in her character arc, it's never a good sign. You essentially have to strip her foundations away just to make her more relevant to the current iteration. She was loyal in the book and this was never considered to be shameful. But, to create unnecessary drama, they did what they did, even though "discernment" is explored in Dune: Messiah with the rebellious Fremen.
The Chani from the 2000 miniseries is far more accurate to the books, hence more enjoyable to watch.
Chani came across as a self insert from a spoiled brat 20 year old from LA role-playing Dune.
Personally, I love the book but I think chani is easily the cringiest thing in it. This isn't exactly a response to you, so much as just my thoughts on it.
It seems pretty gross and super dated that Paul basically comes to arrakis as a colonizer, then pulls up to the natives who treat him like Jesus, then starts hooking up with a character who literally just about worships him. Think about how unethical that power imbalance is lmao. You could say it's part of paul's character, but the creepiness of it all doesn't really fit thematically with what Dune is about, so why not just clean it up and change it? Plus I see Dune 1 chani as one of those things Herbert must have regretted, hence the changes that came later; I'm sure he would have been cool with it. But then we got people like toh768 here who miss a character who's defining personality trait, to them, is that "she was loyal... and this was never considered to be shameful." Ah yes, just what I look for in a romantic partner, someone so blinded by loyalty I can do just about anything I want, and they'll just be cool with it - like a little puppy.
I loved the changes to Chani's character for the movie. It seemed like Chani had a way stronger sense of values that make sense to her given the way the culture of the fremen is established within the context of the movie. And, in the movie, Paul betrays her trust in a massive way, so she gets hurt and pissed. Without consulting or informing her, he decides to go drink a poison that's supposed to be certain death, then seems to (surprise!) actually die, then he does a complete 180 on what she thought they agreed on: that he wasn't down with the whole "I'm actually your god" thing (I get why but it'd still be a pretty big dick move from her perspective, right?). Early in pt. 2 he tells Jessica it's extremely messed up how she's manipulating the fremen. He and Chani saw eye to eye on that - until they didn't. So it's two massive, back-to-back betrayals! I think that hurt, concerned, and then pissed is how emotionally healthy, real people would respond to something like that. billybatts8283 said here "Chani came across as a... spoiled brat 20 year old from LA." Like -- what? I truly don't understand how someone could reach that conclusion based on what's in the movie. It's kind of giving... sexism? Now, I'm not saying that's you; your opinion is different from mine, but it makes sense. Did Zendaya's portrayal of Chani, or the writing of her character seem like a spoiled brat to you?
Yeah it's different from the book, but it's been like 60 years since Dune was published, and I look back on certain things in the book as a product of the time. Also, it's almost impossible to make someone else's artistic vision reality, and do a good job. You ever see the movies that stephen king thinks are good adaptations of his books? or the one he made himself? They are very, very bad. That's a dude who can't let go of his own vision, so the stuff turns out terribly - like, sorry there's no stupid hedge monsters my guy, but the shining is a good movie.
Anyway, movie Dune 1 and 2 are another look at Dune, in a slightly different font than the OG. I feel like we are crazy blessed that we got Denis of all people, with this budget no less, working on it. Dude frickin loves Dune - and so many bold choices. As you said, cinematic masterpiece.
@@billybatts8283 can’t agree. giving a character discernment and a moral centre makes them a better character. Book Chani just mindlessly worships him.
Adaptation from book to screen needs alterations and I believe Dennis made the best version for screen possible
I really really wish Dennis would release a longer cut with the deleted scenes
@@LuisSierra42agree with this in a big way. I'd love to get an extended cut similar to what we got with Lord of the Rings. As good as the theatrical cuts were, the extended editions were a significant improvement. The same could certainly be done with such a rich and dense story as Dune.
it only needs alterations for commercial purposes, and in Hollywood profit trumps art. That's why it makes the movie sloppy and irrational from the story development point of view. Villeveuve made a horrible job.
@@user-ADystop agree to disagree 👍🏼
I really missed the Fremen’s terraforming agenda and also their entire Spice-culture. I believe the writers conflated the effects of Spice with the prophecy, and thus the Fremen skeptics must consider Water of Life to be “worm piss” that you are likely to die from drinking.
Another important difference: Paul never trains the Fremen Fedaykin. They are supernemt badass without his involvement. Which then raises the question: why hadn’t they wiped out the Harkonnen already?
I agree abandoning the Thufir storyline in Dune Part 2 was disappointing and a missed opportunity to add depth to the House Atreides mythology… not to mention the further development of the Baron’s character, who is almost reduced to a pantomime villain in the second movie.
My own headcanon is that Chani was pregnant with Leto II but she had a miscarriage
One aspect that I dearly missed from the books were the many great lines spoken by the characters. It's all gone in the movie.
Sad true, but you can’t just copy dialogue line for line. Avatar live action is a perfect recent example of how trying that can backfire horribly.
The best lines are internal thoughts and non-verbal, which makes it hard to adapt.
@@raghudurina2354my name is ONG!!
My biggest negative is the short timespan because trying to get me to belive Paul could become a native and go on to fight and win a war in under 9 months is pure bullshit and pulls me out of the movie big time
Paul was trained his whole life in preparation and the fremen told by the BG for decades
@@kyborgarner9762 hes a 16 or so year old boy and he lived and trained on a water planet
@@joar8219 doesnt matter he’s a trained leader and bred by the BG for thousands of years to lead that’s what your original comment is point at
@@kyborgarner9762 yes and the BG training did nothing to prepare him for living in the deep desert and the fact that they fight and win over a super power in under 1 year is bullshit no matter what you say
I agree
even with all the changes the adaptation of the first book clocks to 6 hours. Tough I'd blame part 1 slow burn for not setting up some of the missing details.
I think the DV version is too long winded. It just goes on forever. Dude didn;t need 2:46 for part two.
Yeah part one really dragged in the beginning and didn’t world build very well. They were just using a bunch of dramatic shots with dramatic music to make everything feel weighty but you don’t really learn that much about the world these characters are operating in aside from the fact they are a very feudalistic society trying to take control of some resource lol. It seemed like tons of critical details were missing as I was watching it, and I hadn’t even read the books.
Cannot wait to see the directors cut
Villeneuve stated that he has mo interest in making a director's cut, explaining that everything that was cut was cut for a reason and is now dead to him or something along those lines :/
Chani’s performance was, by far, the weakest. The argument of using her as an object for communicating Herbert’s message on power falls apart when considering Denis turned Chani into a super soldier and expert thopter pilot rolled into one. This is all compounded by Zendaya’s lack of acting chops. She comes off as a pouty feminist with almost no romantic chemistry. Perhaps Denis was pandering to the woke academy for improved odds at the Oscars? Ending the film on her was a big mistake.
The second crime of this film is turning Stilgar into an actual instant meme for mocking religious faith.
Despite all of it, Paul’s excellent performance managed to outshine it all, redeeming the film in the process.
They still had to gave her a modern woman scene, when paul tries to mansplain something to her and she rolls her eyes and he stops..katherine kennedy should be proud
@@bmc9696 men have been explaining things to women who know better for all time. I promise.
This is fucking hilarious as Denis is clearly pandering to the "anti-woke" crowd in both movies.
@@SuperStella1111 I know, but making a comment about mansplaining or similar in every movie no matter the genre or the plot is a modern thing :).
I disagree, I didn’t like Chalamet in that role, he’s too skinny and boyish, conveniently in the film he only wears still suits that don’t show his real scrawny shape.
Still wished that they acknowledged Chaim’s relation to Liet Chynes
It would have been another avenue for her and Paul to bond over their lost parents, and also give more insight to her differing views from the southern fremen, with maybe her father instilling the “belief in fremen” while being from arakkis and liet believing in the prophecies (which is why Chani has her name) yet from another world
Why exactly did he change the gender of Liet Kynes in the first place!? I didn't feel that the story benefitted from it in ANY way.
@@AbcDino843Diversity and inclusion...obviously. No other reason.
I think they were going to make Stilgar and Chani father and daughter, then backtracked.
@@Alnivol666 nope. Dropped plotline involving Stilgar as dad of Chani.
I think the only change I'm really disapointed with was Jessica's water of life scene. At the same time I can accept why it was condensed as it would be too challenging to bring all the details of it to screen. But man I really wanted to see Paul see the visions of him and Chani and Chani saying "always".
not having scene where feyd tries to kill baron was a bad choice
Besides very few scenes with clunky dialogue i was absolutely enthralled by this movie and I think the channi change was a necessary improvement
Beware charismatic leaders. This was a post hoc comment made by Herbert when he was feeling his popularity with young counter-culture readers and pandered to the "JFK is establishment" bandwagon. For anyone who has read the book and can think, his comment is related but not at all as revelatory as Denis has made it out to be, which has been commonly echoed recently.
Anyone who has read up to god emperor obviously sees how little relevance this comment has towards Paul and his choices.
Wish they would have shown why you don't fire a laser at a target with a shield, and disappointed there was no CHOAM or Navigators Guild representation, sure they show up more in Dune Messiah but I feel as though it will glossed over or just completely omitted =/
The movies sucked out 80% of the plotting and intrigue from the books. Hollywood bought a classic old book, designed a beautiful cover, sold the cover, and threw out the book.
Standard for the breed...😀😃🥱
Pretty much
I wish the _Dune_ story had been split into three parts, rather than two. the plot felt more and more rushed as _Part 2_ went on.
…and then make _Messiah_ into the fourth movement to finish things off, like a symphony 👌
and while I liked the changes made with Alia, it might also been nice if Jessica had kilt the Baron, perhaps?
and… perhaps they could change things around with the Fremen… where Jamis was Chani’s brother/cousin, and the Leto Jr. character melded with Jamis’ child that was also missing from the movie… 🤷🏻♂️
To be fair the plot felt even more rushed in the book than in the film haha. I do think there would have been more time to establish world building elements if the film was longer though.
yes, there is not alot of differences compared to lets say 1984 dune or the miniseries, but by the time alia is a young adult there were no seas in dune, just small patches of green in the desert here and there, by the time of leto the second , river and oasis and most of the planet is covered in green and the sandworms are a rare sight and about to go extinct and most of the spice comes from leto's massive stash and the isolated pockets of desert left intentionally by leto.
if they introduce a sea in messiah it has to be because "magic" not ecological change.
also kynes death is different, in the books he is left to die in the desert without a stillsuit hellucinating a dialogue with his father till he was killed by a spice blow.
thufir parts were removed because the actor was sick.
I have questions about the movie for instance how did they get off the worm and how do they direct the worm where to go?
Hawat serves another purpose: in the novel, right before he's captured, he's talking to a Fremen about the Sardukar. At that point in the story, we're aware of how feared the Sardukar are, but we still don't really know about the Fremen. It's in that scene when Hawat scoffs at them to just "capture one", and the Fremen says "yes.. we did... THREE OF THEM." I'm paraphrasing the scene, but it's one of my fav parts of the novel is just how DUMBSTRUCK Hawat is at the power of the Fremen. We never really see that in the movie. The win the final battle, it mostly seems, because of the worms. meh.
Also, in the movie, Paul still uses the line "he who has the power to destroy a thing has the real control!" He deploys the atomics to the spice fields and then.... all the great houses just IGNORE HIM????? WTF?! Again, this is one of the most POWERFUL moments in the novel, when the two Guild Navigators are shook to their core at the realization that "he means it." But here... NOTHING HAPPENS!!! This is really the only thing I can't excuse in the movie. The fact the Emperor should look 35 and Walken looks every day of the 80 he is... all the other plot changes discussed in this video... I'm fine with all of it. But just walking away from "he who has the power to destroy a thing..."? No. It's a HUGE, GAPING hole in the plot.
I highly recommend watching Dune 2 if you're struggling to understand how we got to the holy war by Dune Messiah. The movie simplifies the sequence of events and makes more sense of the book’s story. In the film, the Lansraad doesn't acknowledge Paul. The Lansraad does not declare war either. Maybe the Lansraad was seeking an opportunity to negotiate a return to the status quo.
Nonetheless, Paul instructs the Fremen to take the war to the galaxy to "make them believers" in forced acceptance of this new reality and conversion. This crucial detail makes the later events in other books much more understandable. By Children of Dune, the religion of Atreides exists across the galaxy. The book glossed over this, and I didn't understand in the book how others across the galaxy had grown to worship and fear the Atreides. If you want to fully appreciate the depth of possible futures that a Messiah movie could reveal in the Dune movie universe, watching Dune 2 is a must for newbies like me.
I agree, Paul would completely lose his credibility if he were not to follow through on his threat to destroy spice production. There is little point in being emperor if no one thinks you are willing to carry out your threats. The Lansraad would have accepted him if the only other option was the destruction of spice. I did really enjoy the movie, and these nitpicks didn't really diminish that. I also understand that this ending gives a better reason for the holy war happening. But book Paul would have carried out his threat against spice, and he would have never ordered himself the holy war.
The Lansraad are neutered by the Guild due to the threat to the spice, which they can confirm due to their own prescience. The house atomics have no bearing on the planetwide ecology of Arrakis, the atomics are no threat to the spice, just Paul's understanding of the relationship between the worms and the spice, and he knows how to kill all the worms, using a chemical reaction.
I caved and I'm going to go see it tomorrow. I'm still disappointed with Part 1, but I will endure as best as I can
I only really disagree with your video about Chani, she is much better in the book and I don't like Zendaya
And chani being the love interest to paul is not a small role.Yes Paul married irulan for political reasons and she is trained in Bene Gesserit ways but she couldn't seduce paul and even have a more intimate relationship with him why?? Because Paul had chani as his true love, friend and advicer and chani is a simple fremen woman with no political side so Paul trusts her completely.sorry but I really don't understand why showing a good relationship is not appropriate in the movie.
Jessica is one of the best characters for me since the books, but the movies elevated her to a new level! Rebecca Ferguson was ABSOLUTE PERFECT, what a character!
The top and bottom of it is that the changes that were made were for dramatic effect and to facilitate a sequel that is easy for the average moviegoer to understand that book is pretty dense and convoluted for the average non sci-fi fan.
How come the films of dune take all of the character development and turn them into rote action sequences? It would be better to throw out all the melodramatics.
No adequate presentation of nexus, no emphasis on the the significance of Paul's transformation, no presentation of the climax of the water of life other than some loose association with chani, no drama when paul confronts the emperor, riding the sandworms was literally as exciting as falling off a log, want me to go on?
The best part of the whole two films was Gurney Halleck saying the Harkonnen are "BRUTAL!"
Everythjng else was a rehash of the David Lynch version and not in a good way. Don't forget the David Lynch version had Talent, at least.
The overemphasis on the sardaukar created confusion and distractable good versus evil cliche.
I have to agree the mini series was the best presentation so far. The Villeneuve versions were "whitewashed" with implied significance and little else, IMHO, very little heros journey or transformation from childhood to adulthood other than "ta-da."
Lady Jessica was the most developed character who developed into an extra by the end. Paul's triumph was like watching a Marvel superhero except one without explanation. Stilgar ended up coming across as a religious fanatic fool. Shadout Mapes was a charater who went nowhere. The Bene Gesserit were toothless boogeymen.
What was the point of the ship arising out of the water? Perhaps, everything is indeed meaningless spectacle.
Denis Villeneuve in overemphasizing modern realism diminished the science fiction fantasy. What remained was a confusing allegory of political, cultural Middle East conflict. But, to each his own.
I confess, I fell asleep during the Feyd Rautha tourney.
Where is the story, where is the drama, where is the conflict, where is the resolution? Explosions do little to bring out any of these elements of narration, or in the case of film: to show and not tell.
whitewash
1.. to make something look better than it really is;
Oh, BTW, Duncan Idaho was excellent and Liet Kynes was interesting.
I didn’t read any Dune books, two parts of the movie is what I can talk about. Perhaps if u read the books u might not like these movies bc u now comparing the them to the books. Since I can only speak of the movies I found them interesting. Beautiful scenes, well made. I love the story, the cast. Can’t wait for part 3. 😊
It's like driving to DC to get to LA, you can do it but why?
I think the director has painted himself into a corner as far as the next movie.
wish they had included the mentat part of paul
I really hope there will be an extended release of these movies someday.
What about the weirding way!!!! Paul didn't teach the Fremen any of it, and I was most excited to see how the director would translate it onscreen. It's a bummer because it's too late to be introduced in Messiah...smh
The biggest problem with having Alia yet unborn, is it accelerates the pace of Paul’s rise, in a way that was less believable than in the book.
But on balance, it’s better because the oddness of an adult aware child Alia for the screen-It would’ve taken us out of the movie.
One thing i did not like is that Bene Geserit have gotten telepathic communication (not just a version of a sign language, that is imperceptable to others).
I see a lot of people praising the Chani changes. However, the bigger issue here is if she has left Paul by the end of the film, it can radically change how the sequel projects go, namely the eventual birth of the Twins and Leto II’s rise to become the God-Emperor of the Golden Path. I can admit that Chani in the book never seemed super important, and was more of a background character, but that does not change her eventual importance to the overall narrative. Unless the plan is to have them reconcile (which seems odd given how Paul will wage jihad for the next 10+ years, so if movie Chani has issues with Paul now, she will likely never get over it), or have Paul legitimize his marriage with Princess Irulan, which seems weird to me.
The fact is, you can convey Paul’s spiral into a more villainous character without Chani. Showing his brutality, the right music, etc. can accomplish this (probably better than the book honestly, after reading the book I was confused as to how Herbert thought he was creating a cautionary tale through Paul as he never seemed to fully descend into tyranny in the first book). The Chani change felt weird and unnecessary.
Villeneuve completely destroyed characters and timelines. I wouldn't consider this an adaptation, it is mostly a movie based on the books. How can you say that Alia's character maintained the same relevance as in the books when in the books Alia is a way more relevant character who actually killed Baron Harkonnen being a full grown up at the age of 4? There's not even the tiniest resemblance to the character in the books. The same thing happens every time with Hollywood movies, since profiting is more important than any other artistic elements, all movies end up being the same trash. Lynch's adaptation was way better.
😂 what an awful take. Did you get mad the Baron’s pedophilia was minimized and all but removed?
Every adaptation of Dune completely misses how the Voice actually works
I think that this film did great with the limited time that had to tell this part of the story, after all dune is extense so missing content was expected and and that does not make it a worse way for telling the same story, just another way. With that said. I would love an extended/special edition that covers most of the cutted content that doesn't contradicts what was showed in the movie.
One can only dream
I'm searching of the source of this information : where Herbert said or write that he wrote the Messiah of Dune to prévention people to see Pau as à hero ? Never heard that before ...
Because it isn’t a thing. It’s a rumor. Several parts of Messiah and Children (2nd &3rd) book were written before Dune was finished.
The book is so different from both movies, Kyle and Sean’s relationship nearly nailed it, but Tim and Zendaya are vastly different and far from the Book.
I didnt enjoy part 2 i didnt hate it but i did not enjoy it! i think house harkonnen was just poorly handled !
Herbert did not criticize "messiahs" paul is just not the messiah , hes the voice in the wilderness , or your john the baptist figure. Herbert criticized religion , and painstakingly gave you a piece of every world religion , in the spacing guild bene gesserit , fremen triangle.
Thanks for the insight, agreed
The Book:
Most Chapters start with "insert quote, by the Princess Irulan"
The Movie:
We don't bother telling you the name of the Princess
I never saw the wierding way used in his adaptation either
Certainly not in the way it was portrayed in the miniseries
my understanding is that she takes a worm, for a reason, to go back south, to go to get the water of life, to threaten to poison the worms and destroy the spice, in order to make paul step out of the lie and stop being evil