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

payn

I don't believe in the no-win scenario
Hi Deset,

Perhaps you are upset? Maybe not?...it's hard to discern emotion from text. Anyway, "I'll bite," "own it," "if you want to pretend," seems a tad aggressive. Maybe your having a bad day? No worries, it happens to me too. Don't worry, though, I'm not coming for you. I just wrote an article on a film.

Anyway, about your points, I never intended to write a comprehensive review of the film for this reason: if a project is fundamentally flawed from its onset because of a bad idea, it is adequate to solely address that flaw.

Similarly, an argument based on a flawed premise does not need to be evaluated for its use of supporting reasons and responses to counter arguments if the premise is incorrect from the get go. Details become irrelevant at that point.

Similarly, my assessment of the film is that Villeneuve had this one bad idea, so everything that proceeds from that bad idea is not something I need to address. It sounds like you are yearning to hear more. That's fine. I was not interested in writing more than I did about the film.

The removal of the Spacing Guild from the story is another simplification of the story that exhibits Villeneuve's belief that he can improve Herbert's story. That disappointed me. An article could have been written that used an event like this as a basis to critique the film, but I chose not to do that. The decision to conclude the film with the shot of Chani leaving because Atreides is marrying the Princess was what leveled me. That filmmaking decision by Villeneuve indicates where Villeneuve's attention lies and reveals his willingness to change the story; in this case dumbing down the depiction of sexuality, power, politics, and character. Villeneuve did not have a concluding shot showing his changes to the Spacing Guild or the Emperor. Therefore, I did not emphasize those.

In joining you with my disappointment at changes to the Guild (or, more to the point, their absence) and change to the Emperor, I was also confounded by the changes to Alia and the willful altering of the timeline and chronology that produced little benefit for Villeneuve. I read him address this change in timeline and I have yet to understand what the filmmaking payoff was for him. Timelines are very malleable in film narratives and usually can be sidestepped easily in order to convey the emotional affect the filmmaker wants.

But that was not what I wanted to write about. You appear to be unhappy that I did not write a comprehensive review that does not address these items. In fact, I think I could have accepted these changes and enjoyed the film if he had not so superficialized Chani's character. I do not know it why it was that issue I responded to so strongly. I suspect it is because he doubled-down on it by concluding the film with the shot of her departure. That felt stunning in some way; and insulting to Herbert. The first time I saw the film, I sat in the theater not able to get up for a few moments...trying to digest what I had just seen.

The editing, cinematography, acting, production design, costuming, and scoring were all excellent.

The whole Jackson example was simply to say Jackson's efforts on The Hobbit also suffered rom this same bad idea phenomenon. Perhaps I went on too long. But, perhaps not. Perhaps the article is about both filmmakers and their ill-fated decisions? Judging by the response here, people want to discuss The Hobbit more than Dune anyway.

As to the nerd rage claim. Sure. Guilty. Whatever. That's labeling. We can label things all we want...what net gain do we acquire from those labels?

Soloist claims I misread the entire ending, which I truly hope is correct. I am looking forward to what he or she has to say to convince me I am confused.
To be fair, it does feel like taking a nitpick and damning the entire film. I dont think The Hobbit; The totally expected trilogy is a fair comparison in any way to what we received in Dune part 2 from DV. I think that you make an equivalency in directorial approach between PJ and DV here that suggests this is an attempt to make a comprehensive issue of your complaint. Its pretty much a proclamation that the director made a massive mistake in some attempt at bettering the author while also appealing to fan service.

Perhaps, those elements are worth considering, but I think you have it backwards in that this is an incredible adaption that has a few missed opportunities as opposed to falling to well executed schlock.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Wow, I hope you are right!

What makes you view Chani's character in this way? Why did she leave him right after his proposal? Why was her departure edited such that it was made to appear connected to her being upset with the proposal?

Even then, even if Chani is now an opponent to Atreides, that is a major change to Chani from the book and still would be exhibit A in the argument that Villeneuve was captive to the bad idea that he can do better than Herbert...but, despite that, I am not seeing what you are claiming. It's a great interpretation, but where is the evidence in the final minutes of the film?

How many professional critics discuss issues of adaption in their reviews? I have read a fair number of the Part Two reviews; usually the importance of changes from the book are left to nerds like myself and Deset Gled.

I'd love to read a professional review that affirms that Chani's departure and the decision to conclude the film with that departure is not an elevation of romantic pique that was not in the book. Heck, are there any professional reviews that interpret Chani as now an embodiment of resistance to Atreides's megalomania?
Could it be that the Western Patriarchal Male Gaze is orienting your interpretation of Chani actions despite how Villeneuve characterized her in both movies?

I know it sounds bad. I'm guilty of it from time to time, as my wife likes to remind me.
 

Hatmatter

Laws of Mordenkainen, Elminster, & Fistandantilus
Its pretty much a proclamation that the director made a massive mistake in some attempt at bettering the author while also appealing to fan service.

Perhaps, those elements are worth considering, but I think you have it backwards in that this is an incredible adaption that has a few missed opportunities as opposed to falling to well executed schlock.
I think Villeneuve, did make a massive mistake and I do think it was in attempting to better the author (I do not know what the "while also appealing to fan service" refers to, I do not think Villeneuve was doing that).

Maybe I have it backwards? Who knows? I was very much disappointed by the film when I wanted to -- and in fact expected to -- enjoy it. Anyway, I am open to Soloist or Payn or anyone else showing me I misunderstood the ending. I think it would be great if that was the case. I don't want to dislike the film.
 

Hatmatter

Laws of Mordenkainen, Elminster, & Fistandantilus
Could it be that the Western Patriarchal Male Gaze is orienting your interpretation of Chani actions despite how Villeneuve characterized her in both movies?

I know it sounds bad. I'm guilty of it from time to time, as my wife likes to remind me.
Anything could be, Soloist. Walk me through it....
 


Mannahnin

Scion of Murgen (He/Him)
I hope you are right! That would be great. The execution was very confusing if that is what Villeneuve was going for. And, why so many changes to Herbert's story?
Other changes I'm less clear on. Like I said, I was disappointed by the lack of buildup/contextualization of Yueh, the emptiness of Arrakeen and the lack of the dinner scene. The biggest issue I had with the first movie was that it felt like it established epic scope and scale but that the running time wasn't used efficiently enough. That may have been because Villeneuve knew he wanted the duel to be the endpoint of the first movie, but I still really would have liked to see the items I named included.
 

Mannahnin

Scion of Murgen (He/Him)
I think Villeneuve, did make a massive mistake and I do think it was in attempting to better the author (I do not know what the "while also appealing to fan service" refers to, I do not think Villeneuve was doing that).
Given how Herbert felt like he erred, in making it insufficiently clear that heroes are to be questioned and often feared, and that Paul is not a shining paladin or champion of good, I'm less inclined to criticize Villeneuve for trying to make that clearer.
 

payn

I don't believe in the no-win scenario
I think Villeneuve, did make a massive mistake and I do think it was in attempting to better the author (I do not know what the "while also appealing to fan service" refers to, I do not think Villeneuve was doing that).
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".
Maybe I have it backwards? Who knows? I was very much disappointed by the film when I wanted to -- and in fact expected to -- enjoy it. Anyway, I am open to Soloist or Payn or anyone else showing me I misunderstood the ending. I think it would be great if that was the case. I don't want to dislike the film.
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.
 

GreyLord

Legend
She self-affirms that she doesn't want to do anything with where Paul is going by leaving him and ridding the worm into the desert. Chani is characterized as a strong-willed female character in the two movies. It's best to understand her last action as painted in the same light by the Villeneuve. That is probably why no professional critic across the world doesn't see what you see, as you claim in your article.

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.
 

Mannahnin

Scion of Murgen (He/Him)
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?
(*exacerbates) Yes, exactly!

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.
...and her questioning him and his choices, her skepticism of him and decision not to loyally stand by him when he finally chooses to take the throne and unleash the jihad, are very much asserting her independence of mind.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top