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.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe great hope for remaining true to the original story is the director is French. That nation, so far, has an enviable track record of resisting the cultural disease called woke. On the other hand, given the success of Dune Part 1, there’s now big money at stake…
Unfortunately he’s French-Canadian. Just like Justin Castro-Trudeau, the Woke-Emperor himself.
Unfortunately he’s French-Canadian. Just like Justin Castro-Trudeau, the Woke-Emperor himself.
The great hope for remaining true to the original story is the director is French. That nation, so far, has an enviable track record of resisting the cultural disease called woke. On the other hand, given the success of Dune Part 1, there’s now big money at stake…
Whatever happened to the simple idea of “being true to the original”?
Whatever happened to the simple idea of “being true to the original”?
I can’t believe I was just talking with a coworker about this, this morning. We were talking about sci-fi classics from the golden age of sci-fi and how they had such lasting appeal and how many of the protagonists were not supposed to always be in the right. Dune being the main example.
Reader: “What’s this? I don’t like what is happening to Paul. He is becoming a manipulative, kinda fascist monster.”
Herbert: “Yes that is the point!”
Reader: “You mean I am not supposed to treat the protagonist in the right simply because they are the protagonist?”
Herbert: “…”
Reader: “but how am I to take sides and make moral decisions if i don’t know who the good guy is in obvious and absolute terms ?”
Yes, there does seem to be an element of this. The same thing is happening in art and literature too. If the author or painter hasn’t led a totally morally good life (by today’s standards), they are not worthy of being read or viewed unless updated to make them completely non-offensive to those who hold ‘progressive’ values.
I was thinking of something similar recently while reading a book about the Battle of Stalingrad. There is no “good side” in a fight between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. There are only individual humans in a ghastly situation caused by the choices made by individual humans.
Yes, there does seem to be an element of this. The same thing is happening in art and literature too. If the author or painter hasn’t led a totally morally good life (by today’s standards), they are not worthy of being read or viewed unless updated to make them completely non-offensive to those who hold ‘progressive’ values.
I was thinking of something similar recently while reading a book about the Battle of Stalingrad. There is no “good side” in a fight between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. There are only individual humans in a ghastly situation caused by the choices made by individual humans.
Reader: “but how am I to take sides and make moral decisions if i don’t know who the good guy is in obvious and absolute terms ?”
I can’t believe I was just talking with a coworker about this, this morning. We were talking about sci-fi classics from the golden age of sci-fi and how they had such lasting appeal and how many of the protagonists were not supposed to always be in the right. Dune being the main example.
Reader: “What’s this? I don’t like what is happening to Paul. He is becoming a manipulative, kinda fascist monster.”
Herbert: “Yes that is the point!”
Reader: “You mean I am not supposed to treat the protagonist in the right simply because they are the protagonist?”
Herbert: “…”
I do not accept that audiences were upset with Daenerys Targaryen’s ‘conversion’ to a character embodying evil etc.
Audiences were upset that this conversion was part of a deliberate plot ‘armor’ device by the writers to wrap things up in very few episodes in a horrible final season.
This conversion was just sloppy work from the writers who were apparently in a hurry to close the final season and then move on to their Star Wars project (which ironically never materialized).
If done properly, audiences would have loved Daenerys’ conversion (especially in a series known for for brutal plot twists). The same with Dune, especially the third trilogy book.
Books 4 and 5 (especially 5) however are overall problematic if not impossible to convert to a meaningful screen adaptation (though an attempt in Scifi Channel was not that bad)
Agree with you on Daenerys. The main issue there is that there was no logical or progressive build up to her change in character. She just completely flipped after watching her friend get killed however this had already happened to her before without her going genocidal so it just didn’t make much sense.
If done properly, it would have worked very well. The writers just didn’t seem to know how it was going to end initially and thus not allowing much time in the story for the change and then last minute decided that she was just going to suddenly change character, logical consistency be damned.
Hopefully because Dune already has an ending written, and a good one at that, they will just stick with it. And if they want to do further sequels, they would have to stick with the ending otherwise the storyline of the second book just wouldn’t make any sense.
The series might have ended more satisfactorily if GRR Martin had actually got the written books finished instead of leaving the script writers dangling and having to make a stab at the ending.
The series might have ended more satisfactorily if GRR Martin had actually got the written books finished instead of leaving the script writers dangling and having to make a stab at the ending.
Agree with you on Daenerys. The main issue there is that there was no logical or progressive build up to her change in character. She just completely flipped after watching her friend get killed however this had already happened to her before without her going genocidal so it just didn’t make much sense.
If done properly, it would have worked very well. The writers just didn’t seem to know how it was going to end initially and thus not allowing much time in the story for the change and then last minute decided that she was just going to suddenly change character, logical consistency be damned.
Hopefully because Dune already has an ending written, and a good one at that, they will just stick with it. And if they want to do further sequels, they would have to stick with the ending otherwise the storyline of the second book just wouldn’t make any sense.
I do not accept that audiences were upset with Daenerys Targaryen’s ‘conversion’ to a character embodying evil etc.
Audiences were upset that this conversion was part of a deliberate plot ‘armor’ device by the writers to wrap things up in very few episodes in a horrible final season.
This conversion was just sloppy work from the writers who were apparently in a hurry to close the final season and then move on to their Star Wars project (which ironically never materialized).
If done properly, audiences would have loved Daenerys’ conversion (especially in a series known for for brutal plot twists). The same with Dune, especially the third trilogy book.
Books 4 and 5 (especially 5) however are overall problematic if not impossible to convert to a meaningful screen adaptation (though an attempt in Scifi Channel was not that bad)
My recollection is that in Dune Part One, Chalamet has a vision of the future (when he and Rebecca Ferguson, his extremely hot mother, are hiding in the tent on the run) in which he hears people calling out his name and people are being killed in vast numbers across the stars.
I also think that Villeneuve has not shied away from a “bit of a downer” ending in prior science fiction movies, neither Arrival or Blade Runner 2049 really ended entirely happily. So, I’d be surprised if it does not end with a murderous jihad being launched. He’s also mused on possibly adapting Dune Messiah to make it a trilogy, which would also imply a jihad happening.
My recollection is that in Dune Part One, Chalamet has a vision of the future (when he and Rebecca Ferguson, his extremely hot mother, are hiding in the tent on the run) in which he hears people calling out his name and people are being killed in vast numbers across the stars.
I also think that Villeneuve has not shied away from a “bit of a downer” ending in prior science fiction movies, neither Arrival or Blade Runner 2049 really ended entirely happily. So, I’d be surprised if it does not end with a murderous jihad being launched. He’s also mused on possibly adapting Dune Messiah to make it a trilogy, which would also imply a jihad happening.
Didnt he become a worm in the book?
He did. As I recall it, the spice worms had beome extinct, Sheathing himself in their larval form Paul was metamorphosed into a worm which contained a measure of his consciousness, as would all subsequent generations of the worms.
No, it was his son Leto II who took the Golden Path by coating himself in sandtrout, then developing into a human/worm hybrid.
When he met his end the trout shed off his body and developed into sandworms that retained a trace of his consciousness.
No, that was his son Leto Atreides.
He did. As I recall it, the spice worms had beome extinct, Sheathing himself in their larval form Paul was metamorphosed into a worm which contained a measure of his consciousness, as would all subsequent generations of the worms.
No, it was his son Leto II who took the Golden Path by coating himself in sandtrout, then developing into a human/worm hybrid.
When he met his end the trout shed off his body and developed into sandworms that retained a trace of his consciousness.
No, that was his son Leto Atreides.
Didnt he become a worm in the book?
Denis Villeneuve is French Canadian. He is not French.
And, as it happens, the cousin of F1 race car driver Jacques Villeneuve.
And, as it happens, the cousin of F1 race car driver Jacques Villeneuve.
Denis Villeneuve is French Canadian. He is not French.
To be fair, don’t think people had an issue with Daenerys Targaryen turning to the dark side per se. The trouble was it was done in such a cack handed fashion over a couple of rushed episodes. The less said about Bran taking over the Iron Throne the better…..
The good news is Denis Villeneuve has a great track record of pushing his films onward to dark challenging endings. Check out Incendies, Enemy, Prisoners, Sicario, Arrival and Blade Runner 2049 for proof of this particular pudding………
To be fair, don’t think people had an issue with Daenerys Targaryen turning to the dark side per se. The trouble was it was done in such a cack handed fashion over a couple of rushed episodes. The less said about Bran taking over the Iron Throne the better…..
The good news is Denis Villeneuve has a great track record of pushing his films onward to dark challenging endings. Check out Incendies, Enemy, Prisoners, Sicario, Arrival and Blade Runner 2049 for proof of this particular pudding………
As an aside from the main theme of this article – I agree with the main point generally – I’d like to add an observation about the way the latest Dune has been made by Denis Villeneuve. It suffers from the same problem that Bladerunner 2049 does: too monochrome.
I realise that this is to emphasise the future dystopian theme in Bladerunner, and of course the immense majesty of the Arrakis desert is the main theme of Dune, but what’s missing in Dune is the splash of colour that ought to be provided by the scenes on the imperial capital planet of Kaitain, where the devious skullduggery of Emperor Shaddam amongst the Bene Gesserit, the Spacing Guild and the Landsraad etc all occurred. It’s a real pity that the opulence, splendour and majesty of that part of the book was ignored in the film, because it would have (a) provided a break from the relentlessly beige theme of the film, and (b) also provided much more context to the complex backstory that is the most interesting aspect of the Dune universe.
However, going back to the article, the part where Paul Atreides leads the Fremen army on a galactic jihad in which 61billion people die is not even in Dune book one. It appears in the second or third book and even then is only a fact that pops up in conversation. Although the jihad is of course the main story in books 2/3, it is also made clear that Paul’s ability to predict the future has led him to this because he sees that without the Jihad, humanity will perish entirely.
To be fair, don’t think people had an issue with Daenerys Targaryen turning to the dark side per se. The trouble was it was done in such a cack handed fashion over a couple of rushed episodes. The less said about Bran taking over the Iron Throne the better…..
The good news is Denis Villeneuve has a great track record of pushing his films onward to dark challenging endings. Check out Incendies, Enemy, Prisoners, Sicario, Arrival and Blade Runner 2049 for proof of this particular pudding………