OSCARS 2022: Dune (2021)

In 2020, I finally decided to do a David Lynch retrospective for this blog. That meant watching his divisive adaptation of “Dune,” Frank Herbert’s groundbreaking science fiction novel. Since I always heard Lynch’s film was famously convoluted, I figured it would help to read the book first. The fact that I muddled through eight hundred pages of sci-fi gobbledygook just to flesh out a review should show you my commitment to this blog. Anyway, Lynch’s film is a cult classic now but was a flop in the eighties. It was but one in a long line of mostly failed attempts to bring Herbert’s book to life. In 2016, Legendary Pictures acquired the rights to “Dune” and quickly secured acclaimed filmmaker Denis Villeneuve to direct. Villeneuve promised to make the definitive “Dune,” to the point of splitting the adaptation in two and developing several multimedia spin-offs. Defying the odds, Villeneuve not only managed to get his “Dune” made but also made the film a commercial and critical success. The sci-if epic has been further validated with ten Academy Award nominations, including one for Best Picture. 

Villeneuve’s film covers the first half of Herbert’s book. As with all versions of “Dune,” the story revolves around the desert planet of Arrakis, home to enormous sandworms and a mind-expanding drug known as spice. He who controls the spice controls the universe, they say. The noble Atreides house — led by Duke Leto and his son, Paul — have recently been granted control of Arakis. This has really pissed off the wicked Harkonnen house, who have controlled Arrakis for generations. They hatch a plan to kill the Atreides and reclaim the planet. Paul and his mother are soon left on the inhospitable world to die. Paul must gain the trust of the Freman, the fierce desert-dwelling locals, if he is to survive and face down his grand destiny to be a ruler and a messiah. 

Herbert’s book is, to say the least, dense. His prose is thick, his dialogue is atrocious, and his characters are archetypal. The literary “Dune” is so buried in world-building that it includes over a hundred pages of appendices, to flesh out the fictional universe’s history, environment, and glossary. To be frank: “Dune” is some Deep Nerd Shit and that’s why filmmakers have struggled for decades to make an accessible, commercial film out of it. To his credit, Villeneuve manages to humanize and streamline much of Herbert’s creation. He includes new scenes between Paul and his mentors — his father, his mother, battle instructors Duncan Idaho — to strength their relationships and deepen their personalities. Duke Leto is given a bigger role and his ethical strength is emphasized. A weird incest subtext is inserted between Paul and his mom, to add some flavor. As much of the exposition, which the book is absolutely drowning in, as possible is conveyed visually. The film even inserts some laidback humor, something the stiflingly dry novel was definitely lacking.

The cast also deserves some credit for further humanizing Herbert’s thinly sketched characters. Timothee Chalamet was, perhaps, born to play Paul Atreides. He invests the angsty budding savior with some pathos and personality. Oscar Isaac and Rebecca Ferguson don’t really have much chemistry together but you at least believe them as loving parents, as well as a noble leader and a mystic. You really can’t undersell the charisma of Jason Momoa, who grants a tiring noble warrior cliché like Duncan Idaho with humor and personality. The same can be said of a surly Josh Brolin or an empathetic Sharon Duncan-Brewster, who enliven characters like Gurney Henrik and Dr. Kynes. The bad guys are given a lot less to work with but Dave Bautista and Stellan Skarsgård, buried under extensive make-up, are intimidating if nothing else. Javier Bardem and Zendaya were cast essentially with the promise that they would have more to do in the sequel, though both still give it their all. 

It’s easy to see why Villeneuve would get the chance to make “Dune.” His previous films, “Arrival” and “Blade Runner 2049,” showed his ability to create stunning sci-if imagery. The best thing about Herbert’s book is the detailed world it creates, which Villeneuve’s film honors. The images of bizarrely shaped space ships floating through the either are impressive. The production design, from the inventive costumes and sets down to the weapons, is immersive. This is most apparent during the glimpses we get at the bizarre Harkonen home world. (During which Villeneuve indulges his giant spider fetish.) The movie presents a captivating world that is both strangely familiar and totally alien. Villeneuve even manages to take the goofiest parts of Herbert’s world, everybody wearing personal forcefields and a persuasive magic Voice, and make compelling action sequences out of them. And my favorite thing about “Dune,” those giant worms that create and destroy in equal measure, are given the proper amount of respect. 

But, at the end of the day, it’s still “Dune.” And “Dune” is fucking ponderous, man. The villainous Harkonens are never developed beyond cartoonish evildoers, totally self-interested and visually grotesque. (At least the Baron isn’t a depraved homosexual anymore.) The plot is still concerned with a bunch of bloated — some literally bloated — space nobles attempting to consolidate power and betray each other. The proceedings are still weighed down by mythic subplots about an arcane order of witches and Paul’s engineered destiny to begin a jihad. Much time is devoted to various elaborate ecological or societal or magic rituals, such as the strange ways of the Freman. Goofy bullshit words like “Bene-Gesserit” or “thumper” or “Kwisatz Haderach” are still thrown around freely. As when Herbert wrote it, and when David Lynch previously filmed it, nobody stopped to consider how ridiculous a poison gas spewing false tooth looks on-screen. I know there are people out there deeply invested in this stuff but I can’t get over how incredibly dorky it is. 

Maybe my biggest problem with Villeneuve’s “Dune” is that it literally does not have an ending. There’s a time jump in Herbert’s book that would’ve been an ideal place to cleave an adaptation in two. Instead, Villeneuve’s movie ends at a much earlier point, when Paul and Jessica are first accepted by the Freman. That’s about halfway through the book but it’s also barely after the end of the first act. That makes “Dune” feel like an extended effort in world building, that takes its time to establish the beginning of a story that is not yet finished. When the opening credits reveal this as “Dune: Part One,” it means it. Which makes rating this as a movie difficult, since it won’t truly be complete until part two comes out in 2023. When combined with a frequently slow, overly reverent pacing, I was left with a deeply unsatisfied feeling as the credits started to roll. 

At least we’re going to actually see that ending. If “Dune” had failed to connect with general audiences, this would be an even more frustrating experience. Luckily for Duneheads the world over, the movie was a hit. I can’t really consider myself a part of this fandom. (Though I’ll go to my grave remembering what nonsensical phrases like “Stilgar of the Freman” means, because of the way my brain is wired.) That undoubtedly influences my opinion on the film. “Dune” is deeply Not My Kind of Thing, so some elements that people loved — like Hans Zimmer’s bombastic score — strike me as deeply unappealing. I guess it’s good that big, weird sci-fi like this got a chance to shine and proved to be commercially viable. Ultimately, I respect the incredible craft that went into the making of “Dune: Part One” but can only enjoy it intermittently. [6/10]