Denis Villeneuve Don has rightfully earned its title as one of the best sci-fi movies of the last decade, but that doesn’t mean 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 scrutiny. DonHis 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 gardens of the planet take revenge, everything is thrown into chaos.
Villeneuve’s Don is generally an excellent screen adaptation of the epic fantasy world that Herbert created with his novel; It has tremendous scope, excellent performances, and in-depth world-building that make it easy for audiences to lose themselves in the story. The visuals are stunning, the set pieces are exciting, and the dialogue is just as grandiose as Herbert wrote it. However, it is not perfect. The films make some drastic changes, especially regarding the ending of Don, And some aspects are not improved in Dunn: Part Two.
Don
Related
6
Both movies have serious pacing issues
No movie is sure how to end
The main criticism that arose when Don Was first released in 2021 is its ‘lack’ of an ending. The decision to split Herbert’s novel into two films was not widely discussed before the first film was released, leaving audiences very 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 leaves Don With the impression that it is simply set up for the second part Instead of serving as its own story.
Don introduces the world of Herbert’s novel excellently, but the messy pace prevents it from ever taking on a clear identity in the same way as Part 2 Does. The second film also has pacing issues, with Paul’s time among the strangers often felt rushed And underdeveloped, but at least it has a core message and ideology that was missing from the first part. The focus on religious fundamentalism and prophecies doesn’t really come into play until the second part, although it runs from start to finish in the original novel.
5
Neither movie leans into the goofy side of Herbert’s novel
And Alia Atreides’ character suffers as a result
Both Don Movies have been marketed as a more mature, mature sci-fi compared 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 comical villain 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 by Villeneuve and the studio, but it washes some of it away Dons greatness.
This creates two completely different styles, and while they both work on their own, the gritty, grown-up narrative is a bit inaccurate when adapting the book.
It’s no secret that Star Wars was heavily inspired by DonBut George Lucas’ film isn’t afraid to lean into the goofy aspects of the story – he includes the strange alien designs, the epic-scale warfare and the over-the-top characters. Villeneuve tries to drift away from them. This creates two completely different styles, and while they both work on their own, the gritty, grown-up narrative is a bit inaccurate when adapting the book.
4
Dune 2 doesn’t give much context to the big houses
Apart from Atreides and Harkonnen, these houses are forgotten
Avoid some backstory of the great houses in Don It was understandable, because there is so much more important action going on, but the ins and outs of the 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 unite the Houses, but Dune: Part 2 Gives no context About who the houses are, why they are important, or how he plans to unify them in the future.
With Villeneuve Dunn: Christ Finally confirmed, the absence of the great houses of 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. hope, This information will be provided in Dunn: Prophecy To get the audience up to speed with the details that are omitted from the movies.
3
Villeneuve’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 in Don And its immediate sequel are fairly surprising. The most obvious is the presence of Alia Atreideswho plays a major role in the novel but does not appear at all in the movies (apart from a vision). This is a huge change that fundamentally changes the final act of Dune: Part 2 – for better or worse. Namely, it completely changes Paul’s reasons for marching south and drinking the water of life.
The absence of Alia Atreides also means that The death of Baron Harkunn needs to change from the booksAs he was originally killed by her. In Villeneuve’s film, it is Paul himself who kills the Baron, making his transition to villain even more obvious. Other book changes in Doon 2 Include Chaney’s Disapproving 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 Herbert wrote in his novel simply wouldn’t have worked in the movie. This quickly became obvious with David Lynch Donwho took a much more book-appropriate approach to the story, and it was finally 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.
2
No movie completely set up Dune: Messiah
It’s unclear where the third movie goes from here
Although it was not officially announced that Dunn: Christ would be made until after the release of Doon 2It feels like any film leads smoothly into the third story in Herbert’s series. The conclusion of Doon 2 Sees Paul sending his alien troops to start the Holy War that takes place between this film and the next, but it doesn’t dwell on the political consequences that will become important in Dunn: Christ. The decision to have Chaney leave Paul at the end of Doon 2 too Rewrite their story fundamentally in the third book.
While Doon 2The changes to Chani mostly work for the better, it’s hard to see how Villeneuve will bring them back together for Dunn: Christ. And without them, the story would have been completely different. A large part of the book centers around Paul’s attempts to produce an heir, balancing his relationships with Chani and Irulan as he is forced to choose again between love and duty. Without Chani in the picture, or with their relationship damaged beyond repair, it’s unclear how this will play out Dunn: Christ.
1
The movies downplay the strength of the characters
Their full power is not shown until the end
in DonThe fringes are not seen in full force at all. Paul meets a small group led by Stilgar at the end of the film, but he easily defeats their champion in combat soon after – as a result, the audience is not given much reason to believe in the power of the desert people. This becomes a rather big problem Doon 2Especially after seeing the full military force of the Harkunn army and the Sardokar. It is hard to imagine how Paul and the Fremen will ever reach ArakinNever defeat the Baron and the Emperor.
The full strength of the Fremen army is not revealed until moments before the battle, and even then, their combat skills are not shown until they are needed.
When Paul and his army take on Arakeen in the final act, everything feels a little too easy. The full strength of the Fremen army is not revealed until moments before the battle, and even then, their combat skills are not shown until they are needed. As a result, The frames feel overpowered without any explanation. In the book, Herbert describes their military training, the way they adapted to their environment, and the countless raids they defended against Harkonnen soldiers. All this serves to explain how they are so powerful and raise the tension of the final battle.
Both Don And Doon 2 Focus more on Chani and what she doesn’t want Paul to lead to Fremen, although Herbert’s novel gives more details about the people themselves and their culture. Both work to a certain extent, with Villeneuve’s approach to crafting a tight story with clear character dynamics, but Herbert’s novel arguably has the better world-building and cultural context. Without that, it’s hard to fully understand why Paul uses the frames in the first place, which is the crux of his character arc.