When watching movies, I always try to differentiate between my personal enjoyment and the inherent merits of the movies. There are a lot of bad movies, which I totally and thoroughly enjoy watching, and some really great movies, which I don’t enjoy that much, but still can respect/appreciate.

With this prelude, I totally do not get the positive reactions to Denis Villeneuve’s Dune movies. At the time I am writing this question, part two has 94% critique and 95% audience score at Rotten Tomatoes, 9.0 at IMDB.

In my opinion, Dune 1 and Dune 2 have obviously high production values and good special effects. What I do not like is the acting, the pacing, the total flat/simple characters and the whole narration, which is for me a trivial love story between Chani and Paul, plus becoming a leader and get some revenge. I could simply replace the ‘Dune’ theme with a standard war theme and a few tribes, and I would have exactly the same movie. Also the battle scenes at the end of part 2, they are for me totally cookie cutter war movie/battle aesthetics. (Total waste: There are big Sandworms after all, and combat with personal shields etc.).

My question is, especially if you very much enjoyed watching the Dune movies:

  • Why did you personally enjoy the movie?
  • Do you think this movies have some inherent merits?
  • How do you like the acting/plot/pacing?
  • @[email protected]
    19•9 months ago

    Wtf you didn’t like the acting?

    I would agree the pacing is a little bit too fast at the end of part 2, but especially the first and the beginning of the second are perfectly paced…

    The shots are great. And it looks very good. And that’s not only because of the production value… Also the camera and scenery is top notch. Don’t know when I saw such a good looking movie the last time.

    The replacement of the dune theme is a dumb argument. You could say that about any movie. And also it’s not true. You get topics about ecology, economics, choice, power structures, religious fanatism in a very interesting way.

    Personally I liked the first one better than the second one, mostly because of the pacing issues at the end… I would have been ok with having another hour of runtime :) also some political and economic stuff was cut, which I would have liked to see… Instead they go all in on the fundamentalism… But ok

    I’m not a huge fan of the setting btw… I don’t really like this feudal-sci-fi mix, because it leads to ridiculous situations (comes with a spaceship to the planet and is immediately taken hostage by sword fighters?). Still the movie can compensate with all the other stuff it does and make it somewhat believable. Also I can see over some plot holes if the rest is good. I’m not someone who complaines that the eagles could have flown frodo to mount doom either.

    I really don’t know what you have against the acting, though… They have to transport some ridiculous stuff and they do a great job.

    Have no particular opinion on the characters… I would have liked to see some more screen time from some of them… But I guess that comes down to the additional hour, I would have loved. Think they were what they needed to be. Nothing more nothing less.

    • @[email protected]OPEnglish
      5•9 months ago

      Yes, sorry about the acting, but IMHO Chalamet’s acting is quite wooden.

      I totally agree that the movie looks very good, that’s part of the high production values I mentioned.

      Concerning the characters, we seem also to be in agreement: I would have loved to see more of the non Femen factions, their motivations and pressures.

      Anyway, thank you very much for your input, as mentioned somewhere else, I’ll have to watch the first Dune again, perhaps I’ll find a liking for it in the second try.