Thoughts on Dune (Parts I and II) (Book and Film Spoilers)
- 1 minThere was a lot I really enjoyed in both films, especially the desert scenes in part one and the sandworm chase. I also did not expect a Harkonnen being blasted into the side of a space-combine-harvester by a rocket launcher to look so elegant.
I thought the desert action sequences in part two were directed to make the gravity look slightly lighter than on earth—it was impressive.
Why am I ultimately a bit disappointed? Partly, I think, because despite splitting the book in two, the plot development still felt rushed to me—I’d probably have preferred a Dune trilogy. I’m also unfairly comparing the films to the very high bar Denis Villeneuve set with Blade Runner 2049.
However, most of all, I think the adaptation didn’t capture what I found most tragic about the novel. The ending of the book hit me like a tonne of bricks—the Harkonnens were so evil (much, much more evil than in the films), and how many of us would have been sufficiently humble—and perceptive!—to choose death and Harkonnen victory over the decisions Paul made? I found him sympathetic in spite of the appalling consequences of his actions.
But in the films, Paul and Lady Jessica both drink some worm bile and turn into Anakin Skywalker. I felt no sympathy for either of them, they were just straightforwardly evil. I think the tragic choice of the films was different—it was Chani’s decision to save Paul despite knowing she was playing into his mother’s plans—but this didn’t carry the same weight as Paul’s arc in the book for me.
A final point: I’ve been studying arms control in a master’s program for the last 6 months, and depicting the consequences of a nuclear strike as mainly some big rocks falling on soldiers is not what the world needs right now. This was the one part of the film that made me actively angry and upset—it was a large and surprising error of judgment, especially given the lessons I got from the book.