Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes ofwebsite accessibility

Review: Villeneuve's 'Dune' is a glorious epic half told


TIMOTHÉE CHALAMET as Paul Atreides in Warner Bros. Pictures and Legendary Pictures’ action adventure “DUNE,” a Warner Bros. Pictures release. (Photo: Warner Bros.)
TIMOTHÉE CHALAMET as Paul Atreides in Warner Bros. Pictures and Legendary Pictures’ action adventure “DUNE,” a Warner Bros. Pictures release. (Photo: Warner Bros.)
Facebook Share IconTwitter Share IconEmail Share Icon

Dune
4 out of 5 Stars
Director:
Denis Villeneuve
Writer: Jon Spaihts, Eric Roth, Denis Villeneuve, Frank Herbert
Starring: Timothée Chalamet, Zendaya, Rebecca Ferguson, Oscar Isaac, Jason Momoa
Genre: Sci-Fi, Drama
Rated: PG-13 for sequences of strong violence, some disturbing images and suggestive material

SALT LAKE CITY (KUTV) – Synopsis: When the House Atreides is given control of the desert planet Arrakis the former stewards, the House Harkonnen, plot an ambitious plan to regain control of the planet’s lucrative “spice” industry.

Review: I never bought into the idea that “Dune” was unadaptable. Maybe it was because I had seen David Lynch’s film long before I ever turned a page of Frank Herbert’s novel. Even as an 8-year-old viewer, “Dune” made sense to me. I probably couldn’t have explained the political and economic aspects of the story, but the Atreides and Harkonnen rivalry and the chosen-one aspects of the narrative were pretty clear.

Was the Lynch film a perfect adaptation? No, I suppose not. Embracing the campiness and excesses of the 1980s wasn’t a perfect translation of Herbert’s themes. Then again, maybe they were. “Dune” is rife with greed.

Maybe I’m too forgiving. I enjoyed “Dune” when I saw it in 1984 and I enjoyed it when I saw it in various forms in the years since.

But Lynch, who has disowned his version of the film, is the past. Denis Villeneuve is the here and now.

The first thing you need to know is that this is “Dune: Part One.” Villeneuve’s film covers half of the novel. That doesn’t bother me. I loved “Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring” even though it ends before the real meat of the story kicks in. I’m far more concerned with the quality and clarity of the narrative.

I mostly like what Jon Spaihts, Eric Roth,and Villeneuve have written. However, even though the film is two and a half hours long, the story has been streamlined more than I would have liked. The politics and economics are present, and the focus is predominantly on Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) and his mother, Lady Jessica Atreides (Rebecca Ferguson), but some of the secondary characters like Gurney Halleck (Josh Brolin) are given less screentime than I anticipated. I understand why. The structure of “Dune” would be hard to split into three segments and no studio is going to allow half of “Dune” to take three or four hours. They should, if it best serves the story.

Visually the film is absolutely gorgeous and demands to be seen on the largest screen possible. Lynch’s film was too ambitious for the technology that was available at the time. Villeneuve’s doesn’t have the same limitations. It is big, bombastic, and truly epic. I know that watching “Dune” from the comfort of your home is a tempting option, but “Dune” was literally made to be seen in IMAX. Your first experience with the film should be a faithful representation of cinematographer Greig Fraser's work. How you choose to revisit the film is entirely up to you.

There are pacing issues as many conversations linger longer than they need to. The dialogue is fine, it just needs to be delivered with a greater, more natural sense of immediacy. There are times when the drawn-out formality of politics and royalty is appropriate. There are also times when it feels like a weight around the character’s throat. Jason Momoa’s performance as Duncan Idaho is robust and filled with personality. I wish more of the cast were encouraged to follow his lead. Javier Bardem’s Stilgar is pretty good as well. Zendaya lingers like a ghost. She’s a pale vision, a woman seen in dreams. I’d love to have more of her Chani, but the narrative places the majority of her role in the second half of the story.

What makes me nervous about “Dune: Part One” is that “Dune: Part Two” has yet to be filmed. It isn’t even guaranteed to happen. As half of a story “Dune: Part One” works because it sets up what happens next. If it is asked to stand on its own, it’s incredibly anticlimactic and resolves nothing. I’mentirely aware of what happens next. I still want to see it through Villeneuve’s eyes. Please, let me see "Dune" fully, rather than being left to wonder what might have been.



Loading ...