Film Review: "Dune" *** 1/2
Dune *** ½
Spoilers are contained in this review because it discusses plot points in the second half of the Dune story.
The novel Dune has been deemed unadaptable. Two great directors failed. Jodorowsky never even got his production off the ground, while David Lynch’s Dune is a daring, but ultimately failed film, which is best viewed not as a narrative, but rather as a fever dream fueled by spice. In one way, David Lynch’s attempt was daring, choosing to adapt the world of Dune into a nightmare of the grotesque and melodramatic. Like so many of Lynch’s works, the story shifts tone by scene, transitioning from serious and deadly to comedically over the top. While Lynch often pulls off this high wire act of filmmaking, it does not work here. Then there is the TV Series Dune and the less said about that Sci-Fi television series the better. Now, comes Denis Villeneuve’s version of Dune and, although it is in some ways a safer film than Lynch’s, it is also much more successful.
What Villeneuve does must be seen in theaters. The novel Dune contains multiple story lines, branching narratives, in a story that takes place on worlds far apart, over many years. It is a massive book, with a massive backstory, with an enormous number of characters, fighting on a single world, but for domination of the entire known Universe. This is how Denis chose to approach the adaptation. Jettisoning many of Herbert’s complex thematics, Denis’ film is ultimately about the effect of scale. Scale allows us to realize how the massive dwarfs the small; how the bigger picture overrides the personal; and yet, scale also allows us not to just realize how small we are in the grand scheme of things, but also how special. Even in this massive scale, a single grain can tip the scales… or, in the case of Dune, a single mouse, Muad Dib.
The film begins with a vision of Paul’s, demonstrating his powers and introducing us to the massive planet that is Arrakis. Where Lynch’s film tried to move the story to Arrakis as quickly as possible, Denis holds our attention on Paul’s home world of Caladan. The shot of ships rising from the sea, versus Paul taking a last stroll along the cliffsides of his home; the shots of the ocean and massive waves; all of these have the effect of putting us into an understanding about how outside forces are controlling the small. We see this again as the trip to Arrakis moves forward. Guild ships, which are gigantic, now seen in such a diminutive state when compared to the planet. The images of large ships arriving on the surface of Arrakis. Hell, even the Baron and the suit that he wears makes him appear truly grotesquely large. Timothy Chalamet is perfectly cast because he shrinks into his role. It’s a pretty good take, even if one note. Timothy can be charismatic, look no further than Call Me By Your Name or Little Women, yet here he is unsure of himself; unsure of his place; unsure if he wants to rule. As a result, he seems smaller than he is in real life. Jokes are made from Duncan about his petite build and Gurney warns him how this could be a liability.
The best scene in the film is the attempt to rescue workers from a crawling factory on the desert basin when a sandworm arrives. The worm is the ultimate use of Herbert’s imagery in terms of scale: unimaginably massive for any land animal in our world. Seeing the factory swallowed against the backdrop of the tiny ornithopter as Kynes (brilliantly played by Sharon Duncan Brewster) prays the Fremen ritual for a worm siting. The tension of the scene combines with the visual language of the film to ground the point of Denis’ movie.
Villeneuve also plays with the reverse effect: how scale can emphasize the inherent significance of the insignificant. The hunter-probes are so small that they are unnoticeable and deadly. Paul and Chani (in the few moments we see her) are small in stature as is the fierce Lady Jessica, Paul’s mother. Paul takes the name, Muad Dib, which is the name of a small desert mouse. As Paul flees in a scene in an ornithopter, it is so minute against the vastness of the sandstorm. And yet, just because something is small and seemingly insignificant doesn’t mean that it is. Paul proves that one person can change the balance of the world… or he would… if the movie didn’t stop.
One of the great failings of the film is it’s “ending”. Movies should stand alone even if they are part of a longer series. One of my complaints about Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring was how the film ended. Yes, Boromir’s death is an amazing scene, but the climax of film is Frodo reaching into the river to pull Sam up so they could venture into Mordor on their own. Well… it is actually the decision to go alone, but Sam comes too. It is simply too small a moment. There doesn’t feel like there is any resolution. Compared to the brilliance of the adaptation of Lord of the Rings: Two Towers. Here, Peter Jackson chose to move Helm’s Deep from the middle of the novel to the end of the story. Also, he and his co-screenwriters wrote a brilliant monologue for Sam to deliver about the point of pressing on even when there seems to be no hope. As Sam speaks, the film cuts between the victories at Isengard and Helm’s Deep, and the loss of Osgiliath. We know the story continues. The last shots reveal that Gollum is deceiving Frodo and Sam again. It sets up that he is taking them to Shelob, but even though the story continues, we understand why this movie ended. In Dune, it feels as if no attempt was made to conclude the film. Paul battles a Fremen, but the victory is so unimportant following what has happened in the film that we are left to ponder its meaning. I believe that this is where adaptation truly needs to happen. For Denis Villeneuve to serve his own film, he needed to change the novel. Perhaps adding a vision for Paul to make a decision on at the end of this film would have been more successful.
As with all adaptations from novels, story elements must go. On the whole, this is where I think that Denis does not succeed as well as some are saying. He condenses the story in a way that focuses on the narrative (which is good) but at the expense of most of Herbert’s themes. I do not necessarily think he needs to follow the themes that Herbert is playing with, but he must understand what removing those themes does to the narrative.
Herbert’s novel is many things, but one of most important elements is that it is a critique both of the concept of superheroes and also of a white savior in a colonized world. One of the brilliant strokes of Herbert’s novel is that he makes Paul such a likeable character. We feel for him. We root for him to win. And as a result, we are confused when… he becomes the villain of the story. In a story with some of the worst villains in literature (the Baron, the Emperor, Feyd Rautha), Paul’s decisions at the end are not supposed to be moral. In fact, we are supposed to understand that Paul’s decisions are wrong. Paul gains power by his willingness to wipe out all of known existence. His willingness to do that, even to overthrow the Baron and Emperor, demonstrate egotistical understanding of power. He also, by becoming a god to the Fremen, creates a Jihad that will engulf the universe, killing millions. He claims he’s doing it for the betterment of humanity. Hitler claimed the same thing. So far, in part 1 of Denis’ Dune, there is little suggestion of Paul’s destiny in the novels.
Herbert also wrote this work to criticize the concept of a hero. He believed that when a hero enters a society, people willingly give up their own autonomy and responsibility to enact change, giving those responsibilities to their hero who will act for them. It’s a dangerous idea of supplanting one’s own opinions and actions in favor of someone whom you hold as ideal. Again, we really don’t see any of that in Paul in the film.
Now… does Denis have to use these themes? No. Of course, not. But for better or for worse, he released his version of Dune into a media market that has been saturated by superhero films for the past two decades. If Denis chooses not to focus on these ideas, then Paul becomes simply another superhero in a long line of superheroes. There is nothing particularly special about his journey or his story, it is merely another iteration of the same story Marvel and DC have been telling to us for twenty years, and frankly, I admit, I am getting tired of it. Yes, Dune has superior artistic qualities when matched up against all but the best Marvel films, but without the critique of Paul as an anti-hero, of the dangers of a superhero, the film doesn’t elevate itself above the fray. It is simply another movie in a long line of superhero films. A critique of the concept of a superhero is exactly what our society needs right now, so it is sad that Dune does not appear to be rising to those ideas…….. yet. We will have to see what the second film brings.
With all that being said, Denis has made a compelling classic superhero story with extraordinary visuals expressing his ideas. At it’s best, it’s a work of visionary storytelling in a great manner, at its worst, it’s an audiovisual aid for the novel. When it focuses on just being a slimed down version of the narrative, it fails.
