This review may contain spoilers.
Mike McD’s review published on Letterboxd:
Dune: Part 1 was my favorite movie of 2021. The spectacle of it, getting back into the theater after a while away to see it, everything came together to make that my favorite. Where a lot of people were bothered by only getting "half" of a story, I was filled with hope knowing the other half was coming fairly soon and would conclude this vision and this story that I'm very satisfied about becoming this invested in through the first 2h40m of its telling.
So now here is Dune: Part 2 and now I'm the one left unsatisfied. I certainly don't blame the spectacle part, this is every bit as much of a spectacle as the first and actually quite a bit more than that. I ate up all the visuals on the huge Cinemark XD screen. I also don't blame Javier Bardem, who is having the time of his life playing Stilgar and made me laugh consistently throughout the film. I made a joke to my friend after the 3rd comedic trailer in a row before the movie started that I was glad the audience was getting their laughs out because I didn't expect to laugh at all during the movie. Well I was proven wrong as I was cackling at nearly every Bardem line reading.
So who is to blame for my feeling of disappointment? My top suspect is Frank Herbert. I haven't read the book and I do know there are many other novels but Dune is so acclaimed that I assumed it told a wholly satisfying story. Based on what I got on screen I would not agree with that sentiment. So maybe it's Denis Villeneuve and Jon Spaihts with their adaptation. I've discussed some book changes with a couple people after seeing the film and the book story does sound cooler but also unfilmable and I understand why the changes they made needed to happen. I don't think the changes were my problem with the conclusion, I think it was the conclusion itself.
OK I'm going to go into spoilers now. I have to write down my thoughts on Paul's turn before the 3rd act kicks in. My interpretation is that he is the same Paul as he always was and he wants to save this planet and give it to the Fremon. To accomplish that goal he must take on this role as the messiah to rally everyone around him and win the war. So he's play acting, very well, until his goal is achieved (which frustratingly it isn't by the end of the film...). I was listening to The Big Picture folks discuss the film afterwards and they seemed to think Paul was fundamentally changed by drinking the Water of Life and he now IS the messiah figure he purports to be. The crux of each argument comes down to if you believe he's being genuine with Chani when he says he will love her as long as he breathes. They said he seemed like a zombie when he said that and doesn't really feel that way. I think the only true words he spoke post Water of Life were to Chani. I'm always fascinated when I'm convinced of something so fully then find out that many people have a completely opposite view from me. I doubt there's an argument (that doesn't use evidence from other books past this one) that would push me off of my stance but I'm happy to listen to any of them.
So unfortunately this won't be my favorite film of the year like it's older brother but I still had a fun time at the movies and totally recommend the theater experience for this one. Maybe once we get a part 3 I'll finally get the conclusion to the story I was very much craving at the end of this film.
