cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/13060811

It doesn’t disprove the “unadaptable” claim about the book.

I liked the film, am a fan of the book, and this isn’t a “book was better, they should have just stuck to the book” opinion.

It’s more that watching it (and I’d be curious to see if this feeling changes on re-watch or seeing it back-to-back with pt 1) I felt Denis struggle to achieve everything he was aiming for while controlling rhythm and momentum in a compelling way that captures the spirit of the story and its world.

General spoilers for the story if you haven't read the book and some minor ones about the film

Watching it, I thought the middle section up to Paul drinking the water of life was struggling to not be slow but also convey a sense of gravity and alien spookiness. IMO, it failed at both. The final fight with Routha, without out any sense of Paul’s special KH perspective, feels like an anti-climax. Ditto with the ploy of threatening to destroy the spice not actually working as the houses don’t accept his ascension. The lack of any substantial passage of time undermines the feeling of growth and settling into fremen culture that was sitting right there for Dennis. While the whole messianic issue is given a good amount of attention, no doubt in preparation for pt 3, Paul as KH and the particular struggle he goes through is not.

And to be a tad more superficial, the whole IR sequence on the Geidi Prime (Harkonnen home planet) felt rather distracting and unnecessary … the alien/HR Giger -esque aesthetic of the Harkonnens was plenty of creepiness while jumping from visual to IR and back to visual spectra felt disjointed and distracting. I would have preferred a clear look at some Giger-ish art design than the IR look.

Like I said, I liked it. But I could see cracks in the adaptation and with the film being as good as it is I can’t help but wonder what could have been.

I wasn’t going to post this until I watched this interview with Denis on what his influences were for pt 2. Good interview. You’ll find Lawrence of Arabia in his list, which makes a lot of sense. What prompted me here though was that he cited the Road Runner cartoon, where he admitted to wanting to improve on Dune pt 1, specifically to do better at rhythm and momentum, and that he felt like taking notes from Chuck Jones set off a grenade for him. I feel like that’s what I’m picking up on … he clearly was after some sort of forceful pacing … while what I felt was that the film/story wasn’t given the time to breath it needed.

I’d even go so far as to suggest that his statement in the interview kinda confirms my thought, that he really wasn’t quite sure how to manage rhythm and momentum for pt 2, which of the two parts does a lot of the heavy lifting in terms of plot (with pt 1 doing world building and succeeding wonderfully IMO) … and was searching for some inspiration which, IMO, didn’t quite land.

---

For me, I keep coming back to LotR and its film adaptation, an importance reference/standard for this IMO, where I think everyone would agree that the third film, RotK, really captured the spirit and feeling of the book/story (yes even the multiple endings) and nailed the rhythm and momentum for that story.

With Dune pt 2, I’ve come away not feeling like I watched the story of Paul Atreides. It’s something close, frustratingly so for me ATM, to the point where I’m inclined to re-read the book to kinda look for this sense I have in my mind. By contrast, the LotR films never made me want to re-read the books straight after, as I was happy with them as their own experience of the story.