Better late than never.. I know that it's probably not of much use an entry about "Dune: Part Two", now, at almost five months after its release, but this year I didn't have much time for movies, and even less to get to see one in cinema. So, finally reaching a couple of less busy days since a while ago, I'm trying to catch up on what I messed. And I'm trying to be selective.
I think there's not much to be said about the subject. Probably for who doesn't know already what's this about, the best recommendation would be to watch "Dune: Part One", or to go for a cliche line like: before "Game of Thrones"/"Star Wars"/"any other epic SciFi involving an empire and a twisted fight for power between rival factions" there was "Dune". At least since 1965, when the first volume written by Frank Herbert was released. Its latest adaptation is completed in the 2nd part, directed and partly written by Denis Villeneuve. The movie resumes the action from the exile of Paul Atreides joined by his mother in the desert along the indigenous fremens population, hunted by the raids of house Harkonnen, the established ruler of planet Arrakis.
I don't remember what I wrote exactly about the first part, but I think what impressed me most were the visuals and less the rest. The impact of the visuals holds here too. I have a major regret that I didn't manate to see this on big screen. As a complete mix of cinematography + art direction + video editing, it's probably the best SciFi I've seen since "Sunshine" (with a mention for "Inception" in this interval). And I didn't forget about "Avatar" or others, but for any visual appreciation there's a dose of subjectivity. In any case, here the camera work goes more deeply as meaning, as in the references before - it's enough to have a look at the contrast between the visual tone warmth of the desert scenes compared to the monochrome coldness of the fight in the arena under the sight of barron Harkonnen.
I stick to my opinion that both Paul Atreides as well as Chani didn't get benefit of the best character casting, and the previous "Dune" versions nailed this better. The rest of the cast compensates this, and I believe it delivers for all the new introduced characters this time. The part that surprised me most in a positive way though, is that the whole tone of the adaptation deviates less from the line I knew from the original "Dune". There are still elements that seem to be changed for no particular purpose, like the execution of baron Harkonnen, which made me to Google search to confirm which is the written version. But it's not something that changes that much a general feeling, like it was somehow expected after the first part. Maybe Denis Villeneuve heard some criticism about it and changed the course towards a more conservative approach concerning the original material. But besides that there's also a perfect way to handle the "mise en scene" of the written stuff. I think it's extremely difficult to find an optimal way to handle the complexity of "Dune" that doesn't seem too stretched or too brief. Here, in thi "Part Two", I think we can see the optimal way.
Maybe I'm either too old or nostalgic, but for me the most impactful overall adaptation of the "Dune" universe remains the "Children of Dune" mini-series, with all its liberties taken from the written part. From what I remember, there they tried compacting more than what's in the volumes corresponding to the title. The series is, however, the sequel for what we have in this movie, and the story has its role in the impact. So, it remains to be seen how "Dune: Messiah" will turn out, which seems to follow. For now, leaving aside the technical part that cannot be compared, what I can say is that among the adaptations of the original novel, Villeneuve managed with "Dune: Part Two" to provide the best, overcoming clearly the previous two versions. And what we have here it's probably going to stick as a reference SciFi for many years to come.
Rating: 4.5 out of 5
Posts
