Denis Villeneuve’sDunehas rightly earned its title as one of the best sci-fi movies of the last decade, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a flawless adaptation of Frank Herbert’s original novel. Despite all the acclaim and awards, there are certain aspects of both films that don’t hold up perfectly under inspection.Dune’s story follows a young man named Paul Atreides, whose family is gifted ownership of the spice planet Arrakis, from which the most valuable substance in the universe can be harvested. But when the previous wardens of the planet take revenge, everything is thrown into chaos.
Villeneuve’sDuneis generally an excellent on-screen adaptation of the epic fantasy world that Herbert created with his novel; it has immense scope, excellent performances, and in-depth worldbuilding that make it easy for audiences to lose themselves in this story. The visuals are stunning, the set pieces are exciting, and the dialogue is just as grandiose as Herbert penned it.However, it isn’t perfect. The films make some drastic changes, particularly regardingthe ending ofDune,and certain aspects weren’t improved inDune: Part Two.
dune
Dune 3 Is Setting Up A Star Wars Battle 47 Years In The Making (If Lucasfilm Is Up To It)
If the stars align, Dune: Part Three and a new Star Wars project could participate in a battle of sci-fi epics that’s been 47 years in the making.
6Both Movies Have Serious Pacing Issues
Neither Movie Is Certain How To End
The main criticism that arose whenDunewas first released in 2021 was its ‘lack’ of an ending. The decision to split Herbert’s novel into two films hadn’t been widely discussed before the first movie was released, leaving audiences hugely disappointed when the first part closed just after Paul’s first interaction with the Fremen. This happens barely halfway through the book, and everything that comes before is essentially just worldbuilding and exposition.This leavesDunewith the impression that it’s simply setting up for the second partinstead of serving as a story of its own.
Duneintroduces the world of Herbert’s novel excellently, but the messy pacing prevents it from ever taking on a clear identity in the same way thatPart 2does. The second film also has pacing issues, withPaul’s time among the Fremen often feeling rushedand underdeveloped, but at least it has a core message and ideology that’s missing from the first part. The focus on religious fundamentalism and prophecies doesn’t really come into play until the second part, even though it runs from start to finish in the original novel.
5Neither Movie Leans Into The Goofy Side Of Herbert’s Novel
And Alia Atreides' Character Suffers As A Result
BothDunemovies have been marketed as a more mature, adult sci-fi in comparison to the countless family blockbusters that are in cinemas today. However,the original story was never as dark and gritty as the movie. From the comically villainous Harkonnens to the adult-baby hybrid of Alia Atreides, there are so many details in the book that either don’t make it to the films or are simply watered down to make them more accessible to general audiences. This was probably a smart decision from Villeneuve and the studio, but it washes away part ofDune’s greatness.
This creates two completely different styles, and while they both work on their own, the gritty, mature storytelling is slightly inaccurate when adapting this book.
It’s no secret thatStar Warswas heavily inspired byDune, but George Lucas’ film wasn’t afraid to lean into those goofy aspects of the story - he includes the weird alien designs, the epic-scale warfare, and the over-the-top characters whereVilleneuve tries to drift away from them. This creates two completely different styles, and while they both work on their own, the gritty, mature storytelling is slightly inaccurate when adapting this book.
4Dune 2 Doesn’t Give Much Context To The Great Houses
Besides Atreides And Harkonnen, The Houses Are Forgotten
Avoiding some backstory of the Great Houses inDunewas understandable, because there’s so much more important action happening, but the ins and outs of this political system are so important in the second half of the book that it doesn’t make sense for Villeneuve’s movies to ignore it completely. There are glimpses of the Emperor, and a few rushed monologues from Paul about his ambitions to unify the houses, butDune: Part 2doesn’t provide any of the contextabout who these houses are, why they’re important, or how he plans on unifying them in the future.
WithVilleneuve’sDune: Messiahfinally confirmed, the absence of the Great Houses from this series will become even more of a problem. The cinematic adaptation will need to drift pretty far from Herbert’s third book to keep up with the changes that have already been made, but the details of Paul’s holy war and the Houses involved are crucial to understanding his character’s journey into the future. Hopefully,this information will be provided inDune: Prophecyto get audiences up to speed with the details that were omitted from the movies.
3Villeneuve’s Movies Change Certain Plot Aspects
Chani and Alia Are Completely Different Characters In The Film
It’s almost inevitable when adapting such a massive piece of work that certain details aren’t going to make the final cut, but some of the omissions inDuneand its immediate sequel are fairly surprising.The most obvious is the presence of Alia Atreides, who plays a major role in the novel but doesn’t appear in the movies at all (except for a vision). This is a huge change that fundamentally changes the final act ofDune: Part 2- for better or for worse. Namely, it completely changes Paul’s reasons for marching south and drinking the Water of Life.
The absence of Alia Atreides also means thatBaron Harkonnen’s death has to change from the books, as he was originally killed by her. In Villeneuve’s film, it’s Paul himself who kills the Baron, which makes his transition to a villain even more obvious. Otherbook changes inDune 2include Chani’sdisapproval of Paul’s quest, Lady Jessica exerting pressure for Paul to travel south, and the reduced numbers of the Fremen before the final act.
Changing aspects of the story isn’t intrinsically a bad thing - books aren’t films and some of the details that Herbert wrote in his novel simply wouldn’t have worked in the movie. This quickly became obvious with David Lynch’sDune, which took a much more book-accurate approach to storytelling and was ultimately condemned for being too ambitious and exaggerated. Villeneuve wanted to avoid this, which is why he took certain creative liberties to make his film easier to understand and interact with.
2Neither Movie Fully Sets Up Dune: Messiah
It’s Unclear Where The Third Movie Goes From Here
Although it wasn’t officially announced thatDune: Messiahwould be made until after the release ofDune 2, it feels like neither film leads smoothly into the third story in Herbert’s series. The conclusion ofDune 2sees Paul sending his Fremen troops out to commence the Holy War that takes place between this film and the next, but it doesn’t linger on the political consequences that will become important inDune: Messiah. The decision to have Chani leave Paul at the end ofDune 2alsofundamentally rewrites their story in the third book.
WhileDune 2’s changes to Chanimostly work for the better, it’s hard to see how Villeneuve is going to bring them back together forDune: Messiah.And without them, the story would be completely different. A large portion of the book centers around Paul’s attempts to produce an heir, balancing his relationships with Chani and Irulan as he’s forced once again to choose between love and duty. Without Chani in the picture, or with their relationship damaged beyond repair, it’s unclear how this will play out inDune: Messiah.
1The Movies Downplay The Strength Of The Fremen
Their Full Power Isn’t Shown Until The End
InDune, the Fremen aren’t seen in full force at all. Paul encounters a small group led by Stilgar at the end of the film, but he easily defeats their champion in combat shortly after - as a result, the audience isn’t given much reason to believe in the power of the desert people. This becomes a pretty sizable problem inDune 2, especially after seeing the full military force of the Harkonnen army and the Sardaukar.It’s difficult to imagine how Paul and the Fremen will ever reach Arakeen, never mind defeat the Baron and the Emperor.
The full strength of the Fremen army isn’t revealed until moments before the battle, and even then, their combat skills aren’t displayed until they’re needed.
When Paul and his army do take Arakeen in the final act, everything feels a little bit too easy. The full strength of the Fremen army isn’t revealed until moments before the battle, and even then, their combat skills aren’t displayed until they’re needed. As a result,the Fremen feel overpowered without any explanation. In the book, Herbert describes their military training, the way they’ve adapted to their surroundings, and the countless raids they’ve defended against Harkonnen soldiers. This all serves to explain how they’re so powerful and raise the tension of the final battle.
BothDuneandDune 2focus more on Chani and whyshe doesn’t want Paul to lead to Fremen, whereas Herbert’s novel gives more details on the people themselves and their culture. Both work to a certain extent, with Villeneuve’s approach making for a tighter story with clearer character dynamics, but Herbert’s novel undeniably has the better worldbuilding and cultural context. Without that, it’s hard to fully understand why Paul takes advantage of the Fremen in the first place, which is the crux of his character arc.
