Dune Part One Movie Ending Explained (In Detail)
Frank Herbert’s bestseller DUNE captivated generations of sci-fi fans. After David Lynch tried his hand at the material, Denis Villeneuve is now taking on the desert planet. In our review we reveal where the strengths and weaknesses of this adaptation lie.
OT: Dune (USA/CAN 2021)
The plot summary
The noble House of Atreides wants to ensure that the drug Spice continues to be mined on the desert planet Arrakis, also known as Dune. Not only does it expand your consciousness, it also enables intergalactic travel. When dealing with the mysterious Fremen people who inhabit Arrakis, Duke Leto (Oscar Isaac) takes a friendlier course than other power holders in the galaxy, who see unscrupulous exploitation as the only means to an end. Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet), son of Leto and the warrior princess Lady Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson), shows a particularly developed empathy and increased interest in Fremen culture. This may soon work to his advantage, as the ruthless Baron Vladimir Harkonnen (Stellan Skarsgård) sets a trap for House Atreides. Now Paul and his mother must flee to the endless deserts of Dune, where Fremen leader Stilgar (Javier Bardem) and the mysterious Chani (Zendaya) live…
criticism
When director and writer M. Night Shyamalan developed his mystery thriller “Unbreakable,” he set himself a tricky task: With this Bruce Willis vehicle, he intended to expand the story mechanics that typically make up the first act of a superhero origin story to a feature-length length stretch. So Shyamalan wanted to sell a third of a story as a whole. Although he secretly had plans to be responsible for an “Unbreakable” trilogy, he had no planning security as to whether the sequels he had devised would actually follow. So how could he turn a story that was incomplete in several senses into a film that works on its own and creates a fulfilling narrative? The solution: Shyamalan took noticeable pleasure in slowing down the first third of a superhero origin story and reinterpreting it as an oppressive, cool mystery. However, he didn’t simply end Unbreakable without a single completed story arc — instead, Shyamalan outlines this beginning of a hero’s debut as a complete journey of self-discovery. Since “Unbreakable,” such a narrative balancing act has become almost a popular sport in Hollywood. The Lord of the Rings trilogy consists of three films produced in one go, creating a cross-film epic; But every third of this saga finds a coherent, rounded ending, so that when you watch parts one and two you don’t get the feeling of being dragged out of a story in the middle.
Josh Brolin and Oscar Isaac in Denis Villeneuve’s Dune adaptation.
Andrés Muschietti’s “It” cherry-picks about half the material from perhaps the most popular of all Stephen King novels — although at the time of production, no one knew whether the adaptation would be successful enough to warrant a second installment. However, the film is structured in such a way that half of It’s adaptation results in a full coming-of-age story-meets-spooky-terror experience. If part two had never come: It would have been a shame, but not a problem. (“It” is so good that the poor second film doesn’t devalue its predecessor!) And the big trick behind the Marvel Cinematic Universe is that every single film — at best — makes you want to watch another film. The best MCU films still manage to create their own arc of suspense and tell a complete story within this large, cross-film connection. Even with the weakest MCU films, one thing is at least certain now: Marvel Studios is such a success machine — it will continue, no one has to be content with a cut main plot in the foreseeable future. Other films, meanwhile, use their weaknesses to underline what a delicate situation Shyamalan mastered in 2000. The enjoyable “Alita: Battle Angel”, for example, tells a complete story in a larger world that invites more detailed exploration in further films — but ends shortly before the end credits in the clumsy start of a potential sequel that becomes less and less likely every month. Some productions are even worse off. The “Divergent” series, for example, came to an unfinished, inglorious end — and as things stand, one cannot rule out that Denis Villeneuve’s “Dune” will be a new “Divergent” in this respect.
“The ‘Divergent’ series came to an unfinished, inglorious end — and as things stand, one cannot rule out that Denis Villeneuve’s ‘Dune’ will be a new ‘Divergent’ in this respect.”
To make one thing clear right away: Villeneuve’s “Dune” is significantly (!) more impressive than the unfinished “Divergent” film series. Nevertheless, director and author Denis Villeneuve and his writing partners Eric Roth (“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”) and Jon Spaihts (“Passengers”) have to accept one major and important point of criticism: they don’t tell a complete story with “Dune”. Neither in the sense of “Unbreakable” nor in the sense of a third of “The Lord of the Rings” — not even in the sense of an MCU film. Their “Dune” is pure exposition, adjusting the chess pieces early in the course of a game, and once they’ve gone through the first set of standard maneuvers, they end the film. The big tactics, the test of strength between the rival factions and the shedding light on how changes affect the inner lives of the characters who have been established for over two hours? They’re saving all of that for a second part, which isn’t a done deal yet, but is entirely dependent on how “Dune” does at the box office (and on HBO Max). To make matters worse, the journey to this incomplete ending comes at a glacial pace. Villeneuve packs the same content into the approximately two and a half hours of “Dune” film that one would pack into a “Star Wars” running text at Lucasfilm. We learn the names of groups, places and individuals as well as their original relationship to one another — and what in “Star Wars” would be the dots that mark the end of this textual exposition before the actual film begins, in this “Dune” it is the end credits.
“Dune” comes across large, sometimes epochal images.
Science fiction in particular is a genre in which titles in which a lot of action is squeezed into a small amount of time and productions in which little action is spread over a lot of space stand side by side. Therefore, the lack of events in this “Dune” is not a problem at first — after all, there would be the possibility of using the long phases of resonance between two plot-relevant moments for introspection. Just as Alejandro Jodorowsky imagined for his ultimately unrealized “Dune” film, which was intended to explore the spiritual meaning of the novel. There would also be the possibility of arranging the opening of “Dune” as a kind of sci-fi “Lawrence of Arabia”, in which we are shown in detail Paul Atreides’ acclimatization to the Fremen culture. Instead, Villeneuve (“Blade Runner 2049”) decided to shorten Paul’s bond with the people he was unfamiliar with (completely true to the original) with an esoteric “That’s how it’s meant to be.” Although Villeneuve emphasized before the world premiere of his film that he wanted to distance himself from the much criticized, possible (not necessarily) “A white chosen man saves a non-white people from further exploitation” reading of the original, Pauls remains with this bad compression Inner life and the no less superficial, mystical depiction of the Fremen are exactly what… If Villeneuve had more critical facets in mind, he saved them for part two.
“Although Villeneuve emphasized that he wanted to distance himself from the much-criticized, possible (not mandatory) ‘A white chosen man saves a non-white people from further exploitation’ reading of the template, the severe compression of Paul’s inner life and not remains This is exactly what the less superficial, mystical representation of the Fremen is about.”
Timothy Chalamet (“Call Me By Your Name”) plays his way through this difficult position quite charmingly. After all, his naive and intimidated-looking “I want to do better because I feel like it’s something I was born with” boy is the character in the film with the most facets — all the others are at least purely functionally designed and have one two-dimensional personality at best: Zendaya (“Greatest Showman”) is the enigmatic, sensual, crooning narrator, Jason Momoa is the joking muscle man, as if he had stumbled onto the desert planet straight from the “Aquaman 2” set, Josh Brolin (“Sicaro 2” ) is charismatic and gruff (i.e. Josh Brolin). Oscar Isaac (“Ex_Machina”) is empathetic and determined, Rebecca Ferguson (“Reminiscence”) is gallant and yet combative (i.e. Rebecca Ferguson) and Javier Bardem (“Open Secret”) plays… well, Javier Bardem in the desert. Nobody can shine in their facial expressions, because the emotional worlds of their roles are purely assertions based on the script, and Villeneuve’s dry, calm production does not allow any metafictional playfulness with one’s own image. However, thanks to the precise casting, at least no one is embarrassed. This slender figure drawing could also be better enjoyed as part of the concept, or at least forgiven, if it and the sparse plot served to allow even more space for the discussion of the thematic motifs.
Many of the landscape photos are second to none.
Narrative focal points clearly emerge: Villeneuve transfers the original situation of the novel into the cinema with a focus on colonialism and the exploitation of people and nature carried out under its flag. However, these themes remain a vague presence within “Dune”, a mere springboard for a conflict that will only develop in the possible sequel. “Dune” does not engage in a lively discourse about colonialism, nor does it provide concise food for thought to encourage the audience to engage with it independently. Anyone who doesn’t already know that “Dune” is, among other things, about colonialism will not be made to ponder by the film any more than “Star Wars: Episode I — The Phantom Menace” is able to trigger a debate about tariffs. At least Villeneuve knows how to incorporate the themes of the waste of resources and destruction of nature into his series of epoch-making images — after all, this almost inevitably comes into its own in all the landscape photos. And in one of the few specifically worked out plot elements, the director manages to make the invested audience worry about date palms. Overall, however, pure vibes and awe of size, breadth and depth reign supreme in “Dune” — not story, characterization or themes. Anyway, in part one.
By the way, Semih Kaplanoğlu proved with “Grain” that it is possible to combine a thoughtful, elegiac narrative style and a dense thematic underpinning and thus tell a visually powerful, self-contained sci-fi epic. The 2017 film establishes a barren future in 123 minutes, then slows down dramatically and uses this slowness and lingering nature shots to illustrate both the spirituality of the main character and themes such as human hubris, technological failures and the exploitation of natural resources. Whether Villeneuve’s interpretation of the classic novel “Dune” reaches such depth can only be assessed after another part.
The raw material spice stands out visually from the desert sand. An intoxicating detail shot.
What can now be assessed, however, is the optics: Villeneuve and his cameraman Greig Fraser (“Foxcatcher”) manage to give their images enormous power. Be it the overwhelming expanse of a desert, the oppressive emptiness of a huge room with little furniture and massively worn-out walls, or the heaviness of a bulky spaceship. What Frank Herbert’s “Dune” brings with its weight alone, Villeneuve and Fraser bring to the screen through their imagery. The aesthetic they strive for is deliberately monotonous (completely contrary to what Alejandro Jodorowsky once imagined for his never-realized “Dune” adaptation): House Harkonnen sinks into a shadowy black-on-black that the Atreides clan prefers Gray in all its facets, the desert planet Dune is a gigantic desert full of sand and sand-colored buildings, and both the technology and the fashion of those who live there range in color from beige to ocher to terracotta. Practical and digital elements merge seamlessly in this world, which is also due to Villeneuve’s clever shift in focus — whenever something threatens to become too unreal, he focuses on the faces of surrounding figures, not the unreal. This is a thoroughly consistent vision through which the gravity of the whole thing intensifies, but there are no splashes of color and visual playfulness that would provide lightness and vitality. It is also a vision that allows anyone who loses the thread in this film full of fantasy words to easily remember who the good guys, the morally ambivalent and the bad guys are. Hans Zimmer’s (“Wonder Woman 1984”) score shows the same enormous passion for the original as Villeneuve’s direction. Both the Canadian director and the German composer have been huge “Dune” fans since their youth, and while Villeneuve’s overwhelming enthusiasm certainly comes at a price mentioned above, Zimmer’s advantage is that it is irrelevant to the impact and enjoyment of his music whether you are already confident about going to the cinema. The question of whether there will be a second part is also irrelevant to the score. He hammers and rumbles and carpents with rousing passion, no matter what comes or doesn’t come. Zimmer’s megalomaniac approach fits perfectly into Villeneuve’s epochal pathos with which he demonstrates the film’s show values. At the same time, however, the composer knows how to take a step back in keeping with the narrative temperature of the film: the acoustic force with overlapping percussions and chorales is not used for driving melodies, but rather for awe-inspiring sound motifs.
“Villeneuve and his cameraman Greig Fraser manage to give their images enormous power. Be it the overwhelming vastness of a desert, the oppressive emptiness of a huge room with little furniture and massively worn-out walls, or the heaviness of a bulky spaceship.”
Ultimately, Villeneuve’s “Dune” can be summarized as follows: It is the film version of Villeneuve and his team, after long dreams of one day being able to take on the desert planet, delighting in how big and great and detailed their vision of it is for two and a half hours Scenes are — and they invite everyone who has had the same dream for years (decades) to do the same. And it’s comparable to going to Disneyland and first spending a lot of time on Main Street, USA, strolling through in amazement. They inspect the beautiful architecture, look at characters frolicking there that they have long wanted to meet, look for hidden details that only have meaning for Disney fans, and enjoy the memorable music loop without any haste. And we don’t mean that in a derogatory way — we’ve spent many hours in exactly the same way on Main Street, USA. However, you have to realize that not everyone wants to spend their vacation this way. Some people want to immerse themselves in touching stories at Disneyland, others want to be dragged into thrilling adventures or experience a grueling, wild ride. Villeneuve’s “Dune” is nothing like that, but rather a “fans full of passion for this fictional world dawdle in shock through the part of the park that average families find most boring” trip. Once you understand this, you can better judge whether you want to go along with the “Dune” hype that has ignited in Venice or whether you want to shriek at Villeneuve: “I waited so long to be able to travel here. Now let’s finally drive with something!”
The stranger’s mysterious Chani (Zendaya) serves as the narrator in “Dune.”
Conclusion: “Dune” makes it clear in every single second that Denis Villeneuve loves Frank Herbert’s original and takes immense pleasure in exploring this desert. This is an enthusiasm that should be respected and that could be transferred if there was enough, positive “Dune” exposure. However, a plot worth telling, memorable characters or thought-provoking discussions of the thematic underpinnings of the novel are not to be expected. Villeneuve (perhaps) saved all of that for the potential second film.
“Dune” can be seen in USA cinemas from September 16, 2021.
