Mark Schroeder’s Movie Reviews

Dune: Part Two

Written in

by

Mark

Grade: C

There is a Dune: Part Three forthcoming. I continue to be amazed that it will have taken Denis Villeneuve three movies (over at least 7 1/2 hours, estimating conservatively) to cover what David Lynch did in one 2 hour and 17 minute film. I’ve never seen Lynch’s Dune from 1984. Maybe it will be more up my alley. These new Dunes, though, have felt very bloated and stretched.

I liked Dune: Part Two a little bit better than the first installment. It’s less boring, and characters are more emotionally available. The action scenes are less ridiculous and better-choreographed. Timothée Chalamet is back as Paul Atreides. When out amongst the sand, characters still wear those weird tube things that go in their nostrils. Either I forgot, checked out, or it wasn’t explained, but I never understood their purpose. Characters’ eyes still sometimes turn a piercing, unnatural shade of blue – and once again, Stellan Skarsgård is here, looking like Jabba the Hutt had a baby with Brando’s Colonel Kurtz from Apocalypse Now.

I’ve seen every live-action movie Florence Pugh has been in since Midsommar, so I continued the tradition, as she appears here as Princess Irulan. She counsels with her Emperor father (Christopher Walken) on the state of Arrakis, and various political developments. Austin Butler (Elvis from Elvis and Tex from Once Upon a Time…in Hollywood) steps into the role of Feyd-Rautha – played by Sting in the 1984 Lynch film. Bald-headed, eyebrowless, and resembling a Mad Max extra, he injects the movie with some much-welcomed energy, and the fights that feature him were my favorites. And of course, in this middle chapter, everyone is still after that spice.

I did as much summarizing as I could before my brain started to explode. If all this sounds compelling to you, then by all means, knock yourself out. Dune: Part Two is a marked improvement over the previous one in the trilogy, which – though shorter – felt more lengthy. I still didn’t like it, but more than ever, I’m curious to see if and how they pull it together for Part Three. To think that all this got started because of a little spice.

Grade: C

Tags

, ,

2 responses to “Dune: Part Two”

  1. rachelodell Avatar
    rachelodell

    I liked it better than part 1 as well. I read the book a couple of years ago and have seen the 1984 version. I definitely like the modern effects better but I do believe that the old movie gets to the point quicker without missing any of the important details. In the book, more time passes while he is with the Fremen. His sister is born and can speak like a grown woman at age 2. He and Chani have a child or two. But they end up being inconsequential because they die when the sietch gets destroyed. Maybe the consequence is more motivation for Paul to get revenge. And I feel like when he drinks the water of life and appears dead that that lasts for a longer amount of time in the book.

    Oh and I think they did explain the tube in the nose in the first movie. It all has to do with the filtration system in the suit they wear. Recycled water and all that. I’m not sure exactly what it does since they don’t drink water through their noses. Maybe it catches moisture in the air they exhale. 🤷🏻‍♀️

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  2. rachelodell Avatar
    rachelodell

    Also, in both versions I don’t like how the Baron floats. The book makes it sound like the device on him just lifts him slightly to make him light on his toes, since he’s so fat he needs help to walk. But floating up in the air is weird. Both movies did that.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a comment