6 ms·

Dune: Part Two – Official Trailer 3 [video]

30 points by marban 3y ago

fjfaase 3y ago
It contains a lot of new footage from scenes we have not see yet. If you would put all the fragments from the three trailers in the right order, you would already get quite a lot of the story. That is a problem with trailers, they can become too revealing almost leaving nothing to be looking forward when watching the film itself.
- devonnull 3y ago
  On the other hand, this film is based on a well-known and widely-read novel that's had two adaptations already. For a lot of people, there are going to be no surprises. The trailer is just a visual treat.
  - boppo1 3y ago
    I read the book and it seems there are some heavy liberties being taken with the writing. I'll wait until it's out to pass judgement.
- yifanl 3y ago
  But how can you trust these visions of the future are accurate?
- duskwuff 3y ago
  There's something incredibly ironic about trailers "spoiling" content in a series which is, in great part, about the power of prophecy and predestination.
hydrok9 3y ago
Richard Brody said it best: "Dune: A movie sanded to dullness."
- ShamelessC 3y ago
  Who?
  - Slow_Hand 3y ago
    A critic so droll, elitist, and contrarian that Charlie Kaufman wrote an entire novel (Antkind) satirizing him by proxy.
    - hydrok9 3y ago
      you left out "Correct!"
      - tmottabr 3y ago
        you misspelled incorrect. But honestly, there is so many things wrong in his review that show he does not know anything about Dune, it look like this review is only for him to mention how much he liked the Lynch movie. Only taking a look in the first four paragraphs. Movie take place in year 21,267 not 10,196, it is in-universe year 10,196 AG, that mean after the navigator guild was formed that was when the calendars were reset. The name of the substance is Melange not Spice and it is not a mineral, it is basically sand-worm shit. He miss so much about why Leto was given Arrakis and why the Harkoneens took it back and completely miss the fact that it was the plan all along, i think this probably will be more clear in the next part, although it is mentioned by Leto to Paul that he knew it was a trap. Paul never came to believe he was the messiah since he was not supposed to be, and surely not in the first movie. He will use the Bene Gesserit prophecies in his favor knowing full well the damage it will cause in the universe. But all that will take place in the second part so not sure why he is even mentioning. The Kwisatz Haderach was not meant to be the savior of house Atreides and the Freemen like he say in the forth paragraph. He make fun of Paul vision including Chani, first his dreams are the early signs of his prescience or his ability to see the future, so it is expected he would see her as she will play a important role in his future other then being his concubine and the mother of his children, she is the reason why Paul will rejected the Golden Path, his son will then accept it and became the god-emperor that will rule for 10,000 years. second, he dreaming of her is even in the books that is the source material although he keep forgetting it and things it is the Lynch movie. He keep dismissing things that are in the book because they where not in the Lynch movie like this was a remake of the Lynch movie and not a completely separated and independent adaptation of the same source material. The Lynch movie has a ton of problems as well, it had to cut many things to make the book fit into a 2h movie and it is one of the reasons it was a failure at the time, sure it achieved cult status by now, but it is not a movie without problems. Also why Villenueve movie is so long that it had to be split in two and even with almost 6h they had to cut stuff from the books. It sure has its problems but it is way better then the Lynch movie.. hell, even the John Harrison series is better then the Lynch movie in my opinion.
hrpnk 3y ago
Highly recommended to read Book 1 before the movie comes out. There is just so much more depth and context in the book that was not reflected in 1st part of the film.
- vitiral 3y ago
  I almost think it's impossible to enjoy the movie at all without having read the book. The movie was more like visual candy for a universe similar to the book.
- hulitu 3y ago
  I would say, David Lynch did a pretty good job.
  - jmorenoamor 3y ago
    I strangely love Lynch's Dune, the atmosphere captivated me as a kid, and the feeling has stayed there. The Harkonen were disgusting, repulsive, and Irulan at the intro was a teen crush for me. I also love Villeneuve's version, the design is amazing and has very clever ideas, I enjoyed it a lot! But Lynch's Dune has a special place for me.
    - prepend 3y ago
      There’s a cool book about the making of Dune84 called A Masterpiece in Disarray by Evry, https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/126132210 https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/126132210 The author does a good job of interviewing pretty much everyone in the cast and crew and gave me a good sense of what it must have been like to make the film.
  - dredmorbius 3y ago
    I saw it at the time, having read the books (through Heretics, with Chapterhouse being published after the 1984 film). I've yet to see any of the subsequent or current production(s) absent online clips. The biggest problem with Lynch version (I think of it as the De Laurentiis version, as his name eclipsed Lynch's in the promotions at the time, and Lynch hadn't yet risen in stature with Twin Peaks) is that the story is simply too vast to be told in a single film, let alone one of < 140 minutes running time. Other than that ... the De Laurentiis version was very uneven. Parts of it were excellent. Kyle McLaughlin as Paul was excellently cast, and there were several other notable players and performances (many of whom I wouldn't appreciate until much later), and when the sandworms appeared on screen, I believed. Other effects and editing ... not so much. Critics overwhelmingly panned the film, and it performed quite poorly at the box office. The clips I've seen of Harrison's 3-part miniseries by John Harrison, and the current Villeneuve production, look considerably stronger.
vitiral 3y ago
Possible spoilers below (but probably not if you've seen the first movie or read any of the books) I enjoyed the first movie, but they fucked with things they shouldn't have. Dune's technology was cleverly laid out to create a kind of scifi fantasy world of swords and wizards. The 100% effective shields could ONLY be penetrated by a skilled knife wielder, creating a scifi world of knights. The bene Gesserit served the role of mystic and wizard, which the Kwisatz Haderach could finally unify. It offers a very in your face style combat, which sets up the Dune Fremen as the strongest force in the galaxy. However, the movie effectively stripped the value of personal shields: they are penetrated by dart guns as well as conventional explosives. This effectively nullifies the whole advantage the Fremen would give. AFAICT they did so in order to have more ships and explosions. (There's also the original shield+lasgun=nuclear-detonation, which I always found absurd since it would be trivial to have a remote controlled lasgun demolish any target. If they had nerfed anything I would have nerfed the lasgun, not the shield)
- duskwuff 3y ago
  > since it would be trivial to have a remote controlled lasgun demolish any target This is specifically mentioned, and carried out, in the Dune novel. The justification for why it isn't more common is that the resulting explosion is indistinguishable from a nuclear explosion, and the Great Convention strictly forbids the use of nuclear weapons.
- mlry 3y ago
  As far as I remember the explosion created by a lasgun-shield effect was indistinguishable from a nuclear explosion. Nuclear weapons were banned, their use heavily sanctioned. I think there was a hint that the use of atomics would immediately bring in the combined forces of the Landsraad Great Houses totally annihilating the perpetrator. That effectively prevented the use of the lasgun-shield effect. Though the Fremen set up some shields during the final battle for Arrakeen (in the first book) to draw Sardaukar lasgun fire, thus giving them a lesson to be a little bit more restrained on the use of lasguns.
  - vitiral 3y ago
jackallis 3y ago
absolutely not watching the trailer; will watch the movie w/out knowing single thing that is about to happen, visually, in movie. book series is must read if you want richer experience.

30 points by marban 3y ago

It contains a lot of new footage from scenes we have not see yet. If you would put all the fragments from the three trailers in the right order, you would already get quite a lot of the story. That is a problem with trailers, they can become too revealing almost leaving nothing to be looking forward when watching the film itself.

devonnull 3y ago
On the other hand, this film is based on a well-known and widely-read novel that's had two adaptations already. For a lot of people, there are going to be no surprises. The trailer is just a visual treat.
- boppo1 3y ago
  I read the book and it seems there are some heavy liberties being taken with the writing. I'll wait until it's out to pass judgement.
yifanl 3y ago
But how can you trust these visions of the future are accurate?
duskwuff 3y ago
There's something incredibly ironic about trailers "spoiling" content in a series which is, in great part, about the power of prophecy and predestination.

hydrok9 3y ago

Richard Brody said it best: "Dune: A movie sanded to dullness."

ShamelessC 3y ago
Who?
- Slow_Hand 3y ago
  A critic so droll, elitist, and contrarian that Charlie Kaufman wrote an entire novel (Antkind) satirizing him by proxy.
  - hydrok9 3y ago
    you left out "Correct!"
    - tmottabr 3y ago
      you misspelled incorrect. But honestly, there is so many things wrong in his review that show he does not know anything about Dune, it look like this review is only for him to mention how much he liked the Lynch movie. Only taking a look in the first four paragraphs. Movie take place in year 21,267 not 10,196, it is in-universe year 10,196 AG, that mean after the navigator guild was formed that was when the calendars were reset. The name of the substance is Melange not Spice and it is not a mineral, it is basically sand-worm shit. He miss so much about why Leto was given Arrakis and why the Harkoneens took it back and completely miss the fact that it was the plan all along, i think this probably will be more clear in the next part, although it is mentioned by Leto to Paul that he knew it was a trap. Paul never came to believe he was the messiah since he was not supposed to be, and surely not in the first movie. He will use the Bene Gesserit prophecies in his favor knowing full well the damage it will cause in the universe. But all that will take place in the second part so not sure why he is even mentioning. The Kwisatz Haderach was not meant to be the savior of house Atreides and the Freemen like he say in the forth paragraph. He make fun of Paul vision including Chani, first his dreams are the early signs of his prescience or his ability to see the future, so it is expected he would see her as she will play a important role in his future other then being his concubine and the mother of his children, she is the reason why Paul will rejected the Golden Path, his son will then accept it and became the god-emperor that will rule for 10,000 years. second, he dreaming of her is even in the books that is the source material although he keep forgetting it and things it is the Lynch movie. He keep dismissing things that are in the book because they where not in the Lynch movie like this was a remake of the Lynch movie and not a completely separated and independent adaptation of the same source material. The Lynch movie has a ton of problems as well, it had to cut many things to make the book fit into a 2h movie and it is one of the reasons it was a failure at the time, sure it achieved cult status by now, but it is not a movie without problems. Also why Villenueve movie is so long that it had to be split in two and even with almost 6h they had to cut stuff from the books. It sure has its problems but it is way better then the Lynch movie.. hell, even the John Harrison series is better then the Lynch movie in my opinion.

hrpnk 3y ago

Highly recommended to read Book 1 before the movie comes out. There is just so much more depth and context in the book that was not reflected in 1st part of the film.

vitiral 3y ago
I almost think it's impossible to enjoy the movie at all without having read the book. The movie was more like visual candy for a universe similar to the book.
hulitu 3y ago
I would say, David Lynch did a pretty good job.
- jmorenoamor 3y ago
  I strangely love Lynch's Dune, the atmosphere captivated me as a kid, and the feeling has stayed there. The Harkonen were disgusting, repulsive, and Irulan at the intro was a teen crush for me. I also love Villeneuve's version, the design is amazing and has very clever ideas, I enjoyed it a lot! But Lynch's Dune has a special place for me.
  - prepend 3y ago
    There’s a cool book about the making of Dune84 called A Masterpiece in Disarray by Evry, https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/126132210 https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/126132210 The author does a good job of interviewing pretty much everyone in the cast and crew and gave me a good sense of what it must have been like to make the film.
- dredmorbius 3y ago
  I saw it at the time, having read the books (through Heretics, with Chapterhouse being published after the 1984 film). I've yet to see any of the subsequent or current production(s) absent online clips. The biggest problem with Lynch version (I think of it as the De Laurentiis version, as his name eclipsed Lynch's in the promotions at the time, and Lynch hadn't yet risen in stature with Twin Peaks) is that the story is simply too vast to be told in a single film, let alone one of < 140 minutes running time. Other than that ... the De Laurentiis version was very uneven. Parts of it were excellent. Kyle McLaughlin as Paul was excellently cast, and there were several other notable players and performances (many of whom I wouldn't appreciate until much later), and when the sandworms appeared on screen, I believed. Other effects and editing ... not so much. Critics overwhelmingly panned the film, and it performed quite poorly at the box office. The clips I've seen of Harrison's 3-part miniseries by John Harrison, and the current Villeneuve production, look considerably stronger.

vitiral 3y ago

Possible spoilers below (but probably not if you've seen the first movie or read any of the books) I enjoyed the first movie, but they fucked with things they shouldn't have. Dune's technology was cleverly laid out to create a kind of scifi fantasy world of swords and wizards. The 100% effective shields could ONLY be penetrated by a skilled knife wielder, creating a scifi world of knights. The bene Gesserit served the role of mystic and wizard, which the Kwisatz Haderach could finally unify. It offers a very in your face style combat, which sets up the Dune Fremen as the strongest force in the galaxy. However, the movie effectively stripped the value of personal shields: they are penetrated by dart guns as well as conventional explosives. This effectively nullifies the whole advantage the Fremen would give. AFAICT they did so in order to have more ships and explosions. (There's also the original shield+lasgun=nuclear-detonation, which I always found absurd since it would be trivial to have a remote controlled lasgun demolish any target. If they had nerfed anything I would have nerfed the lasgun, not the shield)

duskwuff 3y ago
> since it would be trivial to have a remote controlled lasgun demolish any target This is specifically mentioned, and carried out, in the Dune novel. The justification for why it isn't more common is that the resulting explosion is indistinguishable from a nuclear explosion, and the Great Convention strictly forbids the use of nuclear weapons.
mlry 3y ago
As far as I remember the explosion created by a lasgun-shield effect was indistinguishable from a nuclear explosion. Nuclear weapons were banned, their use heavily sanctioned. I think there was a hint that the use of atomics would immediately bring in the combined forces of the Landsraad Great Houses totally annihilating the perpetrator. That effectively prevented the use of the lasgun-shield effect. Though the Fremen set up some shields during the final battle for Arrakeen (in the first book) to draw Sardaukar lasgun fire, thus giving them a lesson to be a little bit more restrained on the use of lasguns.
- vitiral 3y ago

jackallis 3y ago

absolutely not watching the trailer; will watch the movie w/out knowing single thing that is about to happen, visually, in movie. book series is must read if you want richer experience.