I think adaptation wise. This is the best we could have ever hoped for. That being said the writing felt rushed sometimes and surprisingly I feel this movie could’ve been even longer to flesh out the villains and the emperor. But I can’t deny coming out of the theater it was an amazing experience
Wow. I really disagree with you guys on the structure. There's a ton of intentional echoing happening here between the first movie and the second, and between the beginning and the end. The first movie starts with exposition from Chani, who only plays a small role in the first film. The second film starts with exposition from Irulan, who only plays a small part in this film. The movie ends with the two of them as the only ones left standing with Paul, two contrasting figures of different perspectives, representing Paul's dual worlds of Freman and Atreides. The first movie ends with one duel, the second movie ends with another. There's the echoing of Feyd and Paul. There's Feyd's duel in the arena vs the ending. The piles of Atreides bodies (taken in one night) vs the piles of Harkonnen bodies (taken in one night). What awed me most about this movie was the structure and ordering, and what has me most excited about a third movie is how he plans on tying up those patterns and structures.
It most assuredly is a middle chapter of a complete narrative (thematically). The narrative which Denis V chose to portray in his movies is mainly Paul's arc and Fremen "liberation". There are soo many more thematic points in the book(s) that Denis has either only alluded to, or completely dropped for filmmaking purposes. Honestly, Paul's arc has a satisfying conclusion only by the end of book #2 Messiah. It is not necessarily a lead up to a corruption arc like the Godfather, nor a redemption arc. [SPOILERS for Book 2] It is more of a Repentance arc. Choices made out of necessity. How do you deal with the eventual inevitable consequences of an action that gave an overwhelming immediate reward?
One of the times that I’m glad I have no experience with the source books and story. I did not like the first very much, but after watching Part 2 and understanding what the hell is going on…. i am now Dune Pilled
U should try books definitely. There is much left out of movie that u wouldnt believe. George Martin was actually inspired by Dune to write Game of thrones because of story complexity and unfortunately u cant see that in movies
Completely agree with everything said haha. I think Villeneuve introduces many themes, but he does it all visually and it's very subtle, almost too subtle. Ironically, a few lines of dialogue would completely smooth it and hit the point home! btwww (I believe Part One is about the death of childhood. From the beginning characters tell Paul he is not ready, he is not ready to fight, to kill, to engage in politics, to feel loss. And we see Paul react to death or the prospect of it multiple times, training with Geurney ends with the shot of the body slashed. When Jessica kills the Harkonnen soldier he is surprised and scared of her brutality. And finally, when he kills Jamis. We see Fremen bless him, the voices say the Kwisatsz has risen... the death of Paul. The beginning of something else. ALSO, the KNIFE FIGHT Part One, is a mirror to the end of Part Two. On purpose, each time it solidifies Paul's change to something else...
I'm confused. I know these people have seen all (or most) of Villeneuve's films, but in which of his films does anyone watching it for the first time really understand what's going on? He just doesn't think audiences need tons of exposition because they should always finish the film uneasy and uncertain about what they're feeling and wanting to engage in extensive "therapy discussions" with other cinephiles. I've long assumed that what Villeneuve WANTS is to provoke exactly the kind of discussion we see here...
1:22:44 Michael, you are not alone. I do the same. Almost never watch trailers and I also close my ears and eyes in cinemas when they play a trailer to a movie I know I want to watch.
I agree with Michael, up until Paul drinks the water of life there’s a good deal of focus on his struggle with the prophecy and not wanting to walk a path that leads to a universal war with trillions upon trillions dying. I’m with him in that struggle, but then the movie jarringly speed runs to the water of life and skips the rest of his journey after awaking to being the Kwisatz Haderach. The books go into so much more details about his visions of the future. There is an entire chapter focused on how Paul sees the future similar to the dunes of Arrakis and not being able to see past some points. The book does such a great job of taking you through the visions and understanding why Paul makes the decisions he does. So much was skipped and left out of this movie like that and it breaks the emersion and disconnects me from Paul’s character. Especially the ending with the choice to have a political marriage with the Emperor’s daughter and how it effects Paul’s and Chani’s relationship. In the book, Paul and Chani were married with children by the time Paul faces the Emporer, and Paul had a second wife, Harah. It’s a much more complicated decision with greater impact.
Seems like they all said they enjoyed many parts of it but had reservations? Pretty balanced complaints and praise, plenty of nuanced thoughts. Didn’t read as pretentious to me
@@JacobShrumWell that’s just what I’m saying. You could tell that they all liked it but for some reason were reluctant to outright say it? Like no one wanted to be the first to come out and say that it was a cool movie. Every compliment had to be bookended with criticism.
Books are not movies anymore than interpretive dance is a movie. They're fundamentally different mediums. Any movie which adapts a book with aims of fidelity is an automatic failure. Just make a fucking movie, stop trying to tip a fedora to the book.
I love that Brian's impression game is on fire in this episode (31:46, 1:34:45) 🔥
I think adaptation wise. This is the best we could have ever hoped for. That being said the writing felt rushed sometimes and surprisingly I feel this movie could’ve been even longer to flesh out the villains and the emperor. But I can’t deny coming out of the theater it was an amazing experience
Wow. I really disagree with you guys on the structure. There's a ton of intentional echoing happening here between the first movie and the second, and between the beginning and the end. The first movie starts with exposition from Chani, who only plays a small role in the first film. The second film starts with exposition from Irulan, who only plays a small part in this film. The movie ends with the two of them as the only ones left standing with Paul, two contrasting figures of different perspectives, representing Paul's dual worlds of Freman and Atreides. The first movie ends with one duel, the second movie ends with another. There's the echoing of Feyd and Paul. There's Feyd's duel in the arena vs the ending. The piles of Atreides bodies (taken in one night) vs the piles of Harkonnen bodies (taken in one night). What awed me most about this movie was the structure and ordering, and what has me most excited about a third movie is how he plans on tying up those patterns and structures.
You guys rule. Thank you for helping distract me from an awful breakup ❤
You want more in the first part? They already finished it two thirds of the way through the book. There’s nothing left otherwise
It most assuredly is a middle chapter of a complete narrative (thematically). The narrative which Denis V chose to portray in his movies is mainly Paul's arc and Fremen "liberation". There are soo many more thematic points in the book(s) that Denis has either only alluded to, or completely dropped for filmmaking purposes. Honestly, Paul's arc has a satisfying conclusion only by the end of book #2 Messiah. It is not necessarily a lead up to a corruption arc like the Godfather, nor a redemption arc. [SPOILERS for Book 2] It is more of a Repentance arc.
Choices made out of necessity. How do you deal with the eventual inevitable consequences of an action that gave an overwhelming immediate reward?
Except Dune messiah is boring as fuck.
One of the times that I’m glad I have no experience with the source books and story. I did not like the first very much, but after watching Part 2 and understanding what the hell is going on….
i am now Dune Pilled
U should try books definitely. There is much left out of movie that u wouldnt believe. George Martin was actually inspired by Dune to write Game of thrones because of story complexity and unfortunately u cant see that in movies
Finally! I was waiting for your review. One of the best storytelling channels on TH-cam.
Looking forward to the return of LFTS.
This movie is amazing
Completely agree with everything said haha. I think Villeneuve introduces many themes, but he does it all visually and it's very subtle, almost too subtle. Ironically, a few lines of dialogue would completely smooth it and hit the point home!
btwww (I believe Part One is about the death of childhood. From the beginning characters tell Paul he is not ready, he is not ready to fight, to kill, to engage in politics, to feel loss. And we see Paul react to death or the prospect of it multiple times, training with Geurney ends with the shot of the body slashed. When Jessica kills the Harkonnen soldier he is surprised and scared of her brutality. And finally, when he kills Jamis. We see Fremen bless him, the voices say the Kwisatsz has risen... the death of Paul. The beginning of something else. ALSO, the KNIFE FIGHT Part One, is a mirror to the end of Part Two. On purpose, each time it solidifies Paul's change to something else...
I'm confused. I know these people have seen all (or most) of Villeneuve's films, but in which of his films does anyone watching it for the first time really understand what's going on?
He just doesn't think audiences need tons of exposition because they should always finish the film uneasy and uncertain about what they're feeling and wanting to engage in extensive "therapy discussions" with other cinephiles.
I've long assumed that what Villeneuve WANTS is to provoke exactly the kind of discussion we see here...
1:17:36 On topic of liking Harkonnens because of their aesthetic: Hugo Boss made uniforms for the Nazis.
1:22:44 Michael, you are not alone. I do the same. Almost never watch trailers and I also close my ears and eyes in cinemas when they play a trailer to a movie I know I want to watch.
I feel this is an stand alone movie
Stumbled across this channel and am a bit surprised at the level of struggle relative with the material.
Expected more.
I agree with Michael, up until Paul drinks the water of life there’s a good deal of focus on his struggle with the prophecy and not wanting to walk a path that leads to a universal war with trillions upon trillions dying. I’m with him in that struggle, but then the movie jarringly speed runs to the water of life and skips the rest of his journey after awaking to being the Kwisatz Haderach.
The books go into so much more details about his visions of the future. There is an entire chapter focused on how Paul sees the future similar to the dunes of Arrakis and not being able to see past some points. The book does such a great job of taking you through the visions and understanding why Paul makes the decisions he does.
So much was skipped and left out of this movie like that and it breaks the emersion and disconnects me from Paul’s character.
Especially the ending with the choice to have a political marriage with the Emperor’s daughter and how it effects Paul’s and Chani’s relationship. In the book, Paul and Chani were married with children by the time Paul faces the Emporer, and Paul had a second wife, Harah. It’s a much more complicated decision with greater impact.
Lord of the Rings is either one book or six books. The idea that it’s a trilogy is some BS that should go home because it’s just getting in the way
Summary: when you and your friends are too pretentious to just admit that you liked the movie.
Seems like they all said they enjoyed many parts of it but had reservations? Pretty balanced complaints and praise, plenty of nuanced thoughts. Didn’t read as pretentious to me
@@JacobShrumWell that’s just what I’m saying. You could tell that they all liked it but for some reason were reluctant to outright say it? Like no one wanted to be the first to come out and say that it was a cool movie. Every compliment had to be bookended with criticism.
My god this is so true!! I normally really like these folks but wow. Also how do they not know this is part two of a 3 part story??
I honestly agreed with all their critiques. Best way they put “this feels too long but also too short” But I loved this movie and I’ll always say it
That would be a pretty short episode - but yeah this type of podcast is always going to be pretentious, that's what you sign up for (and I enjoy it)
Sounds a bit contrarian for the sake of being contrarian
To be fair, a lot of story and characters are super rushed or none existent
Books are not movies anymore than interpretive dance is a movie. They're fundamentally different mediums. Any movie which adapts a book with aims of fidelity is an automatic failure. Just make a fucking movie, stop trying to tip a fedora to the book.
I feel like they said a whole lotta nothing this episode. Like they they’re afraid to say they like or don’t like it. Super dumb