DUNE (2021) Why it Worked and the Others Failed! 

MY FAVOURITE SCENE IN DUNE (2021) - I made a RU-vid short about this for Tier 3 Patrons and Members to accompany this video. Join Here: www.patreon.com/rowanjcoleman

I felt the fight at the end actually lined up nicely with the vision "I will teach you", and he did, Paul learned a lot there.

What I liked best in the 2021 version was Baron Harkonnen. In all of the previous versions, he was a caricature, never a person you could think of as a serious threat and danger. Previous versions focused on the baron's perversity and left out his intelligence. Stellan Skarsgård's baron was obviously a brilliant man, but also radiated both menace and perversity. This made Baron Harkonnen seem vastly more dangerous than the previous versions.

One advantage of the sequential filming of parts 1 and 2 is the time jump you mentioned during your essay. Timothée Chalamet is the first actor I've seen in a film adaptation of Dune that even comes close to resembling the Paul Atredes in the book in terms of age and physical appearance. However in Part 2 Paul will age up at least 2 to 3 years, and having the actor age up as well has got to help the film.

Knowing the Dune story from the book, I think they ended the first movie at the perfect place and couldn't really ended it anywhere else. The second movie is where all the action is.

"As long as the movie is, I'd actually prefer it be even longer" Same, I really like the visual conveyance central style, but most of the characters feel really thin because of it, while on the other hand Paul feels more fleshed out and interesting. The Gom Jabbar scene in particular is much worse at conveying Mohiam than the scifi channel version, but so much better at conveying Paul. But I will say this, I disagree Paul fits into the Campbell style hero. I think that most of the adaptations chose to write him (at least as of the events of Dune) this way, but he's not the redeeming Hero and his apotheosis is to a blood deity. He is not returning with the elixer, he is bringing suffering and in return his godhood chains him. In a sense, a dark mirror of Campbell's hero. Ultimately closer to the GOT show's arc for Daenerys Targaryen (though, much better written), and I think it's great that they recognized this in Paul's character. Also, I didn't initially understand what you meant, but the voices weren't telling him to lose. They were telling him to kill, and in so doing kill himself or the person he was so the Kwisatz Haderach can rise.

What I noticed about DUNE 2021 is in Denis' use of ancient Earth cultures to make otherworldly contexts and situations somewhat familiar. For example: the Emperor's delegation to Caladan felt to me like a 15th century Spanish landfall upon the New World. The ship was like a space age galleon with CHOAM dignitaries in the place of Spanish merchants, Guild officials as Catholic clergy and a herald that lent an air of Moorish influence. The Zensunni elements of the Fremen faith came to life with the images of pilgrims in prayer, fingering beads and studying what looked like small holy scripture books. The buildings of Arakeen, especially the palace, echoing the look of an Assyrian ziggurat... the interiors using indirect, reflected lighting instead of large windows because direct sunlight would cause needless heat. Images of Chani in the desert felt to be taken straight from the Bible. It's in the attention to details that made this DUNE stand out above the others. Another interesting detail is where Paul and Jessica, sitting atop a sand dune, watch the submerged passage of a sandworm. It was like a shark cruising by without noticing their presence. Or maybe it did sense them but couldn't find them as they were sitting still and undetectable at that moment. The event illustrated the danger of humans being exposed in the desert, aside for the heat and dryness. If the sandworm had come nearer to them, they could've died, buried in the shifting sands. That made desert seem even more dangerous. Rather than trying to create a totally original culture, DUNE borrowed from Earth history and changed it just enough to fit the futuristic setting. As much as I do like certain aspects of the David Lynch and the DUNE miniseries, they missed details that could've rounded them out like Denis' version does. Like fragrant candles and incense, certain things will always remain simple and effective, no matter how far into the future we go. I'm stoked for Part 2 but not looking forward to waiting 2 years.

Also, ending where it did gave the viewer a hope shot. After an hour of unrelenting disaster and discomfort, to have Paul triumph in the duel and accept being the Kwisatz Haderrach..on his terms...allows the viewer to exhale. People loved The Empire Strikes Back. But it didn't end when Han was dipped and Luke chopped. It ended with the escape and rendezvous with Rebellion forces. It gave the Empire a clear win. But not utterly crushing our heroes. Similarly Dune ends with the Harkonnen in control, but the viewer can see the seeds of renewed conflict in place. Paul isn't dead as the Baron thinks. He's with the Fremen. Whom we know are more numerous by far than Harkonnen estimates. And Paul is ready to embrace his destiny to see his father avenged. Hope, if not optimism or security.

Paul's "vision" of the fight was, "Paul Atreidies must die," and, "Taking a life is to take one's own" (or words to that effect) - so in essence, Paul killed his own self by doing that which was unlike the person he once was, and becoming someone able to do what the prophesy demanded. Muad'Dib.

I really hope we get a Lord of the Rings style 4 hour director's cut at some point, I've heard and seen some great scenes that didn't make it into the movie.

Paul kinda "died" in ending of part one and in a way Jamis showed him the way: the kid Paul Atreides had to die for the man Usul / Muad'Dib / the Kwisatz Haderach to rise up. "When you take a life, you take your own."

Some of the set ups were great. In previous versions they felt the need to explain the Hunter Seeker. In this version they established the "instant death" Jom Gabbar, so audiences will instantly understand the flying-needle-thingy means "instant death," no explanation needed.

Regarding the dissatisfaction of the film not being complete, as I understand it, The Empire Strikes Back caught a lot of flak as a continuation of Star Wars until Return of the Jedi was released. People don't like having to wait for answers to the questions they have, and that's reflected in their initial reaction (I had a similar feeling of unease with Infinity War when I first saw it).

I think you missed the subtlety of Paul's visions. Every single one of them came true, just not exactly as he saw them. This is even what he says to the Reverend Mother in the beginning when she asks about how accurate his dreams are. Jamis DOES teach him the ways of the desert through the duel and his death at Paul's hand. Paul 'dies' in that fight so that he can be reborn just like how in the vision the voice says to take a life is to kill yourself; Jamis kills him by being killed by him. Chani gives him the knife he uses to 'kill' himself. They all happen. He just can't filter them to see the full truth yet. He isn't at the point in his journey where he can really choose based on his visions because he hasn't been fully awakened yet and they are confusing and indirect in their meaning.

Re: the miniseries' painted backgrounds, the sand used on set was supposed to match the paintings but the wrong sand was delivered and they couldn't fix it in time. I think that would have worked well if not for the mix up.

Paul didn’t ‘decide to kill Jamis and break with the dreams telling him he would die’.. his dreams told him to ‘follow the friend’ and that Jamis would teach him the ways of the desert. He followed this path and the dreams. The voices telling him ‘he would die’ were saying that The boy that he was would have to die so that he could become the Kwisatz Haderach. The whole way Paul follows his dreams and his path that leads into the desert. Instead He breaks from his royal Atreidis birthright and becomes Mua’dib.

as a longtime dune fan (and appreciative of previous versions, warts & all), i'm just stoked that so many new people are getting into it.

i watched 1984 and i had absolutely zero clue that 2021 was cut in half. i totally missed that two second announcement "part one" at the beginning of the movie itself so 2021 felt particularly unsatisfying.

I have to say to say, really don't understand how you could think that the 1984 version of dune doesn't work. Have always loved both versions.

I don't think the voices of the Bene Gesserit are telling Paul to lose the duel. They are asking him to die... metaphorically. "Paul Atreides must die... for Kwisatz Haderach to rise. Don't be frightened, don't resist. When you take a life, you take your own." That last line is crucial, I think. I interpret it as the voices urging him to actually win the duel. To kill. And as he takes a life, he ends his own. He will no longer be the same person, paving the way for Paul Atreides to (potentially) become the Kwisatz Haderach.

Not only that. The success of this adaptation might steer future adaptations of other scifi books towards more faithfulness to the source material. At least that's my hope

As Dune is my all time favorite book and the series overall is inner of my favorites. It actually kind of worried me that this movie is a very faithful adaptation of the book. I was worried that would mean people who haven't read the book wouldn't know what is going on and it would bomb. It makes me so happy that Denis and his fellow filmmakers did a great job with the translation to film and it's becoming a big success. On a side note it makes me super happy to see you Rowan, as one of my favorite RU-vidrs, making videos about Dune! Lol.

What about the 1978 "Lord Of The Rings"? I am still waiting for part 2

I think that the second part is like a really long awaited Entr'acte. When the movie is completed it will be about as long as Lawrence of Arabia or Gone With the Wind. Both of which had two parts in one movie making them about five-and-a-half to six hours long when you went to the cinema.

Imo, it nailed the "vibe" of the original book better than any other adaptation. Instead of trying to be overblown and Shakespearean in its presentation, its drawn out, massive and a bit emotionless at times. People seem to think this is a bad thing, but it touched the same nerve in me as the books have.

As someone who liked the 1984 version as a so-bad-it’s-good camp gem, I appreciated all the subtle allusions to the original movie (unnecessarily similar - though improved - designs that weren’t just a coincidence from the book, some lines/scenes being performed in a knowingly overdramatic way as they were so iconic in the original film, reused - but enhanced - sound effects, Brian Eno’s Prophesy Theme being a clear influence on parts of the score, etc.).

What I loved about this movie was that it took its time to do visual storytelling in such details, that almost no narrative speech had to be used. There were hardly any moments when viewer would feel awkward while characters explain some absolutely certain things to each other (like in Interstellar, where pilot explains to another pilot how wormholes function).

The Benne Geserit voice didn't say he has to lose the duel, it said that Paul Atreides must die so that the Kwisatz Haderach rise.

Thank you Rowan for your wonderful commentary as always! It's amazing how often I end up nodding in agreement with you throughout ALL of your content. Sometimes I feel bad because watching your videos almost feels like validation of my own opinions (which I really don't need haha). Always look forward to your videos, and will be interested when I can finally comment on something we don't 100% agree with ;)

The extended 1984 version worked much better, the music was a million times better than the Denis version too

Apparently Paul is a science fiction fantasy stand-in character for Napoleon Bonaparte. A young noble guy and a military genius who assembles a army of fanatics under the banner of anti-feudalism and makes himself emperor. (In Napoleon's case it was the Holy Roman Empire, which the Dune empire is based on.) He wasn't really written to adhere to classical story telling arcs and norms, but I suppose the real life character could also have subconsciously influenced those tropes and norms.

I had no problems with the ending and the pace. I loved the movie and everything worked well for me. I watched it twice on movie theaters.

I watched the original film last March/April when I started my miniatures painting hobby and I'm in love with the Universe. I watched the new one several times and Ive liked it more each time.

Actually, if this huge degree of effort by a talented director doesn’t conclusively prove that Herbert’s novel is essentially unfilmable, I don’t know what does.

As a new dune fan it’s really great how good this adaptation is. It’s so deep but also accessible

Chani telling Paul "This is only the beginning" was the reassurance I needed to know this was the end of Part 1, so I felt quite excited when it ended. Thanks, Chani!

I think the Hobbit was an example of a film that did not need to be a trilogy. It was split into separate movies as a money grab IMO. I don’t think Dune is like that at all. Because the Dune novel has such a wealth of complex lore and spans quite a length of time compared to the simple and short Hobbit book.(I understand Tolkien’s universe is vast. Just not necessary for the Hobbit’s film) A single Dune movie probably would’ve done this universe a disservice by cutting off important moments due to time constraints.

I agree with your points. Expecially the trimmed down exposition. I started watching Dune reaction vids made by people who know nothing about the novels or earlier films, and have been surprised by how many get what's going on just by the visuals or the implication of the scenes. The hunter seeker for example. As you pointed out Lynch and SyFy found ways to explain it, but everybody I saw got it right away. Paul's reaction, not moving and trying to hide in the hologram was all they needed. While none of them even mentioned the lack of computer, they immediately caught the gist of the Mentat. And that is all they need at this early jucture of the film. And that's where Villinueve (sp?) nailed it; by only explaining what needed to be explained, and doing so in an economic and story based manner. But I do disagree about how the character focus is playing out. It's not just Paul's story, it's Paul and Chani. I know she only appears in his visions so far, except for at the end, but it is her narritive that opens the story and her realtionship with Paul is made core to his awakening. And opneing with Chani is imo another piece of structural genius. It gets you right into the crux of the conflict. And then later Leto tells Paul the Duncan is going to meet the Fremen and why. If I am not mistaken that was not done in earlier films. But it's genius. It tells simply and ecnomically the politics of the situation. The other place I disagree with you, and I've had to go at it with some other people on this, but Paul does not go against the voice when he kills Jamis. He is supposed to kill Jamis in order to Paul Atredis (sp") to die. Because, as the voice tells him, 'when you take a life, you take you own'. And right before his kills Jamis the voice says "Haderach arise"" . So, imo, there was never an alternate future where Jamis kills Paul or Chani kills Paul. The visions weren't literal. But nice vid and explanations. The only thing I don't likie about this version is that I have to wait years for part 2.

Well, for sure best looking Dune, but Villeneuve had to sacrifice many scenes. I do hope one day we will get much longer version with most of the scenes that were filmed but not included.

That’s Rowan. That was an excellent synopsis and I certainly learnt things that were a bit fuzzy in my understanding. Like you I will be seeing it again.

All i care about is that Dune is confirmed getting it´s 2nd movie. Thank god. Since this is actual cinema at it´s finest it would have been sad to not see the full vision realized!

I really enjoyed Dune, Yea its not a "perfect" movie but I don't think I've felt as immersed or transported at the cinema since watching Jurassic park as a kid... and it's so refreshing to not come out of the cinema saying well that was a load of shite... As a fan of the books I think it was a decent adaptation of the first half of the novel.... its funny watching the "die hard" fans tear it to shreds... reminds me of all the complaints about Tom Bombadil not being in the fellowship and how that ruined that movie... You don't have like this movie, but like everyone who loved the ending of game of thrones said.. this is just a different telling of the same story... I stayed away from reviews and went in cold and came out of the cinema really satisfied and wanted to go straight back in and watch part 2... One thing I'll say is that all you hear is that the movie is great but the score is not.. I listened to the sketchbook they released on youtube a month or so ago and hated it... it just baffled me.. and after loving the man of steal sketchbook album I was really disappointed. But hearing the score in the movie it was incredible... really worked within the movie... I've not seen anyone retracting their "dune score sucks" statements so I thought I would..

When it ended, I made a mad dash for the urinal. I didn't know where it was going to end so I didn't want to leave in the middle of it and miss the ending.

Another reason Dune is so difficult to film is all the names given the protagonist. Paul Atreides, Muad'Dib, Paul Muad'Dib, Usul, the Mahdi, the Lisan al Gaib, and the Kwisatz Haderach all come to mind. That’s got to be tough for some of the uninitiated.

I have to say, this version got so much right it is clearly the best version. That doesn't mean there's not some quality in the others. There are some very specific things that we're done better in the David Lynch version.

I completely agree: part 1 is about Paul going from being a pawn to being a man. Part 2 is about the man becoming a messiah. Cogent and well informed analysis. And i thought Part 1 was incredible - went by in a flash!

I'm not worried. Part 1 was great. So i trust the show runner to continue on. Just be patient y'all.

Because unlike the Lynch film it's dividing it into 2 parts and unlike the 2000's mini-series it actually has the budget it needs

It's always a benefit when you have the chance to learn from previous mistakes. Also, judging from the comments I just breezed through, not everyone is as convinced as you that it worked. However, this is not unusual. It's impossible to get a consensus on anything.

I strongly disagree with your take on Dune 2000. Considering the severe budget constraints, I believe they did a phenomenal job with the story arc. In addition, that lack of budget forced the writers to focus more on the characters and less on the gee whiz effects. OTOH I agree with this latest production. It is superb and I can't wait to see the second part.

I love the ending. I read the book during lockdown and went in believing I knew what was going to happen, yet they still managed to pull the rug from under me. Big acclamation Denis

I would say this movie is my 2nd favorite of the Dune adaptations. Great film though they are missing a few things that I have preferred that is portrayed in the Dune Mini Series. Such as the Baron's planning and acting. I appreciate how it shows he got angry at Rabban when he attempted to assassinate Paul too early causing the Baron to have to accelerate his plans at an earlier date. The actor for that Baron did a phenomenal job portraying him. Definitely my best favorite version of the Baron. The new portrayal one's okay for it is superior to the Lynch one but I still prefer the Miniseries version which is said to be accurate to the Book one. I also liked how the Mini Series shows and mentions somethings the movie wasn't able to portray fully unfortunately such as House Atreides able to get Spice production back up despite the Harkonnen's sabotage of their supplies and it shows both perspectives from the Harkonnens and Atreides. The new movie is great still and it definitely has some better elements the Miniseries falls behind of such as the battle scenes. But I appreciate both for how they are. They have their own ways as well as their ups and downs. I hope there is a extended edition for the new Dune movies such as Lord Of The Rings got.

@12:16 The voices Paul hears are not literally the Bene Geserit communicating with Paul, but rather the "Other Memory", the well of genetic memory their Reverend Mothers possess. Also, they're telling him to win. "When you take a life, you take your own. Paul Atreidies must die [ kill ] for Kwisatz Haderach to rise.". Very similar to "Kill the boy, let the man be born" from game of thrones.

Very well done video, and I agree wholeheartedly with you.

I could really sit through a 4hr version. Itook my first look at the watch around the 2hr mark and was surprised how fast time flew by.

I didn't think I'd be fangirling for na-baron Feyd Rautha but here we are... Austin Butler is the method actor behind Sir Patrick Stewart... I loved portions of Elvis and the Giedi Prime montage just cemented it for me.

Great video!

Love this video, and completely agree with you! But allow me a small nitpick on this one: Dune’s time jump is only two years (between the end of section/“Book 2:Maud’dib” when Jessica becomes the new Fremen Revered Mother, and the beginning of section/“Book 3: The Prophet”.) The ten-year time jump is between Dune Messiah and Children of Dune.

I've never heard of the dune series nor did I expect much from it, but I actually loved the movie because it got me curious of the lore, and fuxk me was I intrigued by the world building and now is my favorite sci-fi concept

🙌 thanks for the video

The 1984 film portrays the centrality of language far better than the new one

I’ve got a soft spot for the Lynch version. As a kid who hadn’t read the book seeing it in the cinema rocked my world and all my friends who saw it at the time. As a huge fan of the books now I can see how flawed it is but despite all the things going against it I still consider it a triumph.

Great job!

The 84 film did include the book, but it was also some 4 and a half hours long at first. The studio forced them to cut it.

I actually really like how Dune doesn't spoon-feed the reader/watcher anything. It expects you to be reasonably intelligent and capable of figuring things out with context clues.

The new movie is amazing, but the original is timeless, just ask the countless followers of the original. What it didn't do in the theaters, it made up for over the years as a classic.

I'm glad the LOTR paved the way for studios to have the courage to take up Dune and give it a fair shake. I loved 90% of the 1984 film with the only real complaint being the unnecessary wierding weapons addition and overall squeezing the depth of the story due to time constraints. My complaint so far on this one is that they almost seem to be telling even less of the story with the extra time they have in two films. Lots of time spent on vistas and reaction shots but they aren't really getting much more of the story depth out there. Let's see what part 2 does. I still liked it and am glad that someone with Villeneuve's talent and big studio backing resources is giving it a shot. Can't really give it a full assessment without seeing how it turns out in part 2 though.

I still like the mechanisms David Lynch used in the 'Alan Smithee' edition of Dune. He used a lot of very clever techniques.

I don't necessarily think this worked any better. I think where they ended it didn't really leave much of a payoff to make you hang on edge for the 2nd. I think all of the movies fail at explaining why the tech is stripped down a lot due to the ban on automation. It's not a bad film, It's just not a great one either.

I just came home from the movie. The lingering impression the film gave me of the Dune universe was that it is HUGE and HOSTILE. The entire time over I had this feeling again and again. That a human could easily be killed by this HUGE and HOSTILE world. Not only by the desert, but also by the politics, by the ships, by the buildings... Everything was making humans seem small and vulnerable.

A lot of these harsh takes and definitively absolute language about the “failures” of previous versions may age very badly if the second half fails to deliver. Perhaps we should wait to declare this version as some kind of definitive win until we have the whole story in hand? Adaptations are always going to have a high percentage of subjectiveness, what works best for some will be too much or too little for others.

right time, right cast, right technology, right audience mentality, and right director. sometimes everything you need to make something great comes together at the same time that audiences are ready for it.

Dune takes motivation on the non-initiated to enjoy fully. I'll admit that the novels can be hard to follow. I learn something new each time I read the trilogy. Does that translate into a better film? Probably not.

The others “failed”? I love David Lynch’s Dune. Taste in movies, like all art, is subjective.

New Dune, Villeneuve realized, genius, darkness and scale bring a sense of awe and gravity and you don’t have to show walls and panels full of buttons and screens (where many shows from 50s-90s struggled to build sets to look futuristic and full of modern day computer keyboards, buttons, and screens, present everywhere from Star Wars/Trek to Aliens and everything else).

"Ten year time jump in the middle of the thing"? Someone needs to re-read Dune. It's two years. In the opening of Book 3 we learn that it's been "Almost two years."

I'd sit through 4 hours of this movie and beg for more

Great Exposition !

I think they did the scene with the hunter seeker incredibly well. There was no need for the monologs in Paul’s head.

Personally, i couldn't find anything wrong with how this movie ended, in fact, if we split the book into two parts, then this is probably the most natural point in the plot in which the movie should end, which IMO shows how well the creators are familiar with the source material. Now that being said, i have my gripes that for me at least, blur the lines about which adaptation brings the spirit (not the content) of the book closer to its mark. Namely, the marginalization of some characters. To start with, Yueh's betrayal is severely downplayed. There is no mention of his imperial conditioning and how much it plays a part in nobody suspecting him of betrayal. This leads into point two, the Atreides aren't aware of the trap in this movie, nor are they informed of the traitor in their ranks by their Fremen allies. Being aware of the trap and racing against time to ally with the Fremen in order to counter it, is a big point in the book, and part of the overall desperation and gloom that hangs around all of them. This then leads into the third point. Tuffir Hawat. The Atreides being aware of the traitor and being fed false information to the traitor's identity, leads to Atreides security having Jessica as their prime suspect. All these three and the lack of just a few scenes that would describe how close Tuffir and Yueh are the Atreides, severely diminishes the tragedy of the fall, and takes away all empathy from Yueh's fate. "A million deaths are not enough for Yueh" now holds next to no meaning. I certainly didn't feel any empathy for him. The 1984 version, for all its faults, did portray that chain of events much better and to a greater emotional impact.

Others have not failed. Especially the 1984 version is still my fvorite...

The "voices of the Bene Gesserit" (if that's what they were) didn't tell Paul to lose the fight at the end. They were speaking in metaphor.

Whilst I did feel a bit disappointed at its incompleteness on my first watch, I found that once I knew how the split plot worked I could enjoy it for what it was rather than what it could never have been due to the vastness of the story.

Half a movie is fine but strange where they cut it and how they shifted themes that stretch the entire book completely into the upcoming part 2.

Dune is weird is because it is 10,000 plus years in the future. Could people 10,000 years plus ago imagine how we live in the year 2022?

Great video! The time jump in the books was only 3 years, not 10, btw...

Loved this version! Really beautiful to look at.. still appreciate the 1984 version tho.

The Bull metaphors sprinkle about the movie has to be about the worms and how Paul's journey to ride one. - Part One :P

I'm not sure if it's just me but the spacing guild highlighner looks damn close inspired by looks of sandworms in 2021 adaptation, especially that circular mouth the space ship have

I concur with your assessment that moviegoers will happily sit through a 3 hour plus movie if the story is there and well written/acted.

I don't think I agree with wha tyou said regarding Paul breaking away from the future in his visions and the BG voices telling him to lose the battle. The visions were pretty all over the place with Paul changing positions, which I saw as a hint that the visions showed multiple possible paths. As for the duel, I interpreted the BG voices not as telling him to lose the battle and die, rather I felt it was directed more toward his old self which had to be killed for him to become the Kwisatz Haderach

Why it worked: Denis and Hans! Lol, seriously those two are epically talented people, and Denis’ ability to bring everyone together (and I’ve never seen a single negative comment from any actor towards him) surely brings a big chunk of credit alone. Loved “Arrival” and BR, I was psyched when I heard he was leading this Dune.

one reason: The whole lack of uneeded exposition from the old version. this version uses visuality to sell it instead of expositional dialogue

Still got to place this behind the corny and lovable spinoff games of Dune 2000/ Emperor. Loved the Westwood cheese and just was lovely to play xD

I never understood "Unfilmabale" claims. I think everything is filmabale. Cinema has so many tricks. The problem is often with producers vs fan expectations.

While the director seems to reject the idea, we know there were many additional scenes shot that enhance the world building. I am still hoping for a 3 or 4 hour cut of the first movie, maybe on DVD, with some of these scenes reintegrated. However, if not, it is still one of the best movies I've ever seen and clearly will be considered a classic.

Just wanted to say that I had exactly the same reaction at the end -- meaning that I chose to view it a second time, and with subtitles enabled (a must for virtually all fantasy genres in my opinion), and I LOVED it. In fact, I just pre-ordered the 4K UHD Blu-ray as a result. P.S: I also loved Blade Runner 2049. The director is definitely appealing to my taste in science fiction. Long may he reign.

I loved this adaptation. I want them to keep going.

I don't get people that complain about it being "unfinished". No shit, so was LotR The Fellowship of the Ring. In fact the ending of that movie is pretty similar to this one.

You're told in the title that it's just part of a movie. I just don't see how Dune could be done in a single theater movie. I think they did a great job, setting aside the fact that it requires a part 2. I agree it was a risk to air part 1 without having a definitive plan to bring forth part 2. But... it worked out ok, so I'm fine with it. And yes, longer would have been better, but at least they didn't try to cram part 1 into 90 minutes or something.