May 25, 2023 - 5:30pm

Dune by Frank Herbert is one of the great works of science fiction. It has also defeated multiple efforts to produce a successful film adaption. Until, that is, Denis Villeneuve achieved the near-impossible in 2021 with Dune: Part One.

As the name suggests, the French director’s stroke of genius was not to tackle the story in one go. And so now we await Dune: Part Two — which should bring the adaptation to a satisfying conclusion.

Except that this is Dune we’re talking about. Though the eponymous desert world [spoilers ahead] is freed from its cruel oppressors, the novel does not end with the words “happily ever after”. Indeed, the hero of the tale — Paul Atreides a.k.a. Muad’Dib (played in the films by Timothée Chalamet) — slightly overdoes his liberation theology. And by “slightly”, I mean that he becomes a space-messiah who accidentally starts a galactic jihad that kills 61 billion people. Oops.

This may be rather hard to explain to Chalamet’s adoring fans. In an age where we’re once again re-writing books to excise the upsetting bits, should we also bowdlerise Dune — or at least the movie version? Writing for Comic Book Resources, James Lynch argues that Villeneuve has an opportunity to fix “one of the more troubling narrative threads in the original novels”.

The reasons Lynch gives are two-fold. Firstly, there’s the difficulty of depicting a conflict that engulfs millions of planets. Secondly, it’s “not particularly helpful to the ongoing storyline around Paul’s character as the central protagonist”.

I take the former point, but not the latter. It’s true that the space-genocide thing isn’t exactly relatable; however, it is pivotal to Herbert’s broader narrative arc, which goes on for another five novels.

If nothing else, his fictional universe is an exploration of the harsh realities of human history — one of which is the tendency of liberators to become tyrants. We needn’t delve too deeply into our own past to find examples. Napoleon, Lenin, Mao, Castro, Mugabe — the pattern is undeniable.

So why do we cover it up when we move from fact to fiction — and especially on-screen fiction? It’s not that we expect our heroes to be entirely pure of heart. Various lapses of propriety are expected or even welcome. But if our favourites are handed absolute power, then they’re not allowed to be even slightly corrupted by it.

For instance, do you remember Daenerys Targaryen? Charming girl, good with dragons. She was also a breaker of chains and a freer of slaves — and as such a big hit with the Games of Thrones audience. Therefore, when, at the climax of the story, she turns into an airborne pyromaniac with serious anger management issues, the fans didn’t like it — at all.

I hope the memory of that particular backlash doesn’t cause Villeneuve to play it safe with Dune. For the most part, he’s resisted the woke route to critical acclaim. He hasn’t flinched from portraying a futuristic neo-feudal society in all its horror and glory.

To stop the story short of its shocking denouement would therefore be untrue to Herbert’s work — and to Villeneuve’s own. It would also be disservice to its audience. Every generation should be reminded that revolutionary change, no matter how well-intentioned, is freighted with danger. 


Peter Franklin is Associate Editor of UnHerd. He was previously a policy advisor and speechwriter on environmental and social issues.

peterfranklin_