New review critical of DUNE: PART TWO based on the depiction of Chani

[Lidgar]

I have to admit, I don't see it that way. I think more people will see it just as @Hatmatter stated, she is upset that Paul is not going to be a monogamist with her as his solo partner.

In fact, in the lead up to this film, I recall they did interviews with Zendaya who expressed similar sentiments and how women should be more empowered, that this film would show more equalization for woman. Part of that is showing that she is not some appendage of Paul, but that if she is important than he needs to have her as his equal...not some concubine.

In the movie I definitely got that vibe as well. He's all about her during the main movie, but when he chooses the alliance via marriage, she's upset that he's trying to spurn her as not being equal in that way, and leaves.

I could be wrong, but I didn't get the message that this was her disagreeing with his messianic ascension in any way from watching the film and seeing her run off (upset running off at that) into the desert at the end.

I like the film, but I don't really see it representing what you are saying it is with Chani and Paul. If anything it shows Paul as resigning himself to his fate after fighting futilely against it, submitting to his desire for revenge and survival instead.

I suppose I viewed it both ways. She was angry at Paul through a whole jumble of emotions: him embracing the role of messiah first, then icing on the cake taking the step to solidify his position through the marriage. It represented the final nail in the coffin to seal a path she never wanted to see him go down.

 

[GreyLord]

I dont know, I think he set up a better view than any adaption to date that Paul isnt the messiah folks think he is,a nd Paul's struggle against his fate. Much of that has to do with the changes to Chani, and the Fremen themselves. I saw it coming much earlier than the final sequences that you seem focused on. The return of Gurney exasperates all of it. I thought it was great. Are you taking it all in, or is Chani's end of film scene just a focal point of contention?

The fan service comment was linking back to the allusion to YA tendencies and Clint's comment about, "duh, look who they cast".

It's entirely fair to not like the writing and/or changes. I appreciate your write up, even if I have a few critiques of it myself.

I think what people are trying to carve Chani into in this thread is extremely confusing. In the interviews the actors gave prior to the movie it was explicit that this was going to be more about female equality and empowerment. The explicit reasons for her leaving were not due to some disagreement about his prophetic ability or messianic ascendancy, but that she was his equal in every way and if he wasn't going to treat her that way, she was going to leave.

And she does just that.

It's wild how people are trying to carve it in a different manner. I'm not sure if their interpretation is better or not. In the one, it diminishes the message of the empowerment of women, on the otherhand it could be an interesting twist used in the next movie.

Of course, good movies sometimes are open to have multiple interpretations, and even have interpretations the producers and directors never even intended the movie to have.

 

[payn]

I think what people are trying to carve Chani into in this thread is extremely confusing. In the interviews the actors gave prior to the movie it was explicit that this was going to be more about female equality and empowerment. The explicit reasons for her leaving were not due to some disagreement about his prophetic ability or messianic ascendancy, but that she was his equal in every way and if he wasn't going to treat her that way, she was going to leave.

And she does just that.

It's wild how people are trying to carve it in a different manner. I'm not sure if their interpretation is better or not. In the one, it diminishes the message of the empowerment of women, on the otherhand it could be an interesting twist used in the next movie.

Of course, good movies sometimes are open to have multiple interpretations, and even have interpretations the producers and directors never even intended the movie to have.

 

[The Soloist]

I think what people are trying to carve Chani into in this thread is extremely confusing. In the interviews the actors gave prior to the movie it was explicit that this was going to be more about female equality and empowerment. The explicit reasons for her leaving were not due to some disagreement about his prophetic ability or messianic ascendancy, but that she was his equal in every way and if he wasn't going to treat her that way, she was going to leave.

And she does just that.

It's wild how people are trying to carve it in a different manner. I'm not sure if their interpretation is better or not. In the one, it diminishes the message of the empowerment of women, on the otherhand it could be an interesting twist used in the next movie.

Of course, good movies sometimes are open to have multiple interpretations, and even have interpretations the producers and directors never even intended the movie to have.

Fifty Shades of Sand.

What actors say about their roles is important, but is it in the movie or is it her interpretation? I'll consider that when I view the movie again.

 

[Ryujin]

Fifty Shades of Sand.

What actors say about their roles is important, but is it in the movie or is it her interpretation? I'll consider that when I view the movie again.

I would expect that her view of the character is coloured by the direction she received while playing her.

 

[pukunui]

@Hatmatter: I am curious to know why you keep referring to Paul by his last name.

 

[payn]

I would expect that her view of the character is coloured by the direction she received while playing her.

Sure, but why is this depiction not supported by disagreements about Paul's prophetic ability or messianic ascendancy? I, mean, Paul is her lover and her equal as suggested. He has an oversized influence on the future of her people, as prophesied by her religion, and in the face of it all, she decides he has not treated her like an equal. How is that not empowerment?

 

[The Soloist]

I would expect that her view of the character is coloured by the direction she received while playing her.

Could be, but sometimes the actor's views and the director don't always align perfectly or are not represented in the Final Cut of the movie. The diegetic of the movie itself has precedence over what an actor says in an interview.

 

[S'mon]

Hello everyone,

I am happy to share my review of Dune: Part Two that is ultimately quite critical of the film. The film has been praised to high heaven by the press and by the fan community here...a reception for which I was well prepared given how brilliant I thought 2021's Dune was. Then I saw the film.

Anyway, I share my review with you here: "Dune: Part Two: Denis Villeneuve's Bad Idea, the Mind-Killer of Great Science Fiction."

I am sure that there are many of you who enjoy the film and will disagree. Be nice and we can chat.

Wow, I've not even seen the film, and the book is a distant memory coloured by the David Lynch film, but that was a brilliant piece of writing!

 

[GreyLord]

Could be, but sometimes the actor's views and the director don't always align perfectly or are not represented in the Final Cut of the movie. The diegetic of the movie itself has precedence over what an actor says in an interview.

I agree, that could be true. I didn't see the director commenting on this, so it could be that she saw what was happening differently than what the director saw. As I saw the interview before I saw the film (at least I believe I saw it before the film), it's also very possible that what I heard her talk about also had a direct influence on how I interpreted what she was doing and how she was acting in the film.

I'd still probably need a lot of convincing to see it on your side (as currently I see it differently, but I could be convinced with enough evidence), but I admit that it has happened regularly that actors have different views of their characters than the directors.

One of the more famous (here I go, bringing in another franchise) is Blade Runner where supposedly Harrison Ford said he and the director said his character was human, yet, later, it seems that Ridley Scott has heavily (if not outright said, I can't recall if he did or didn't, so won't say he outright said it) indicated that Deckard was an android.