Something I have noticed is that almost everyone who discusses this movie (and the 1st Part as well) tend to always get caught up in the novels and interpreting the films through the lens of the books. I tend to take films as they are and am indifferent to their fidelity to the source material. Is it good as a film standing on its own?
Something I have noticed is that almost everyone who discusses this movie (and the 1st Part as well) tend to always get caught up in the novels and interpreting the films through the lens of the books. I tend to take films as they are and am indifferent to their fidelity to the source material. Is it good as a film standing on its own?
I have never read the books. I tried to watch the First installment and became quite frustrated trying to even grasp what was going on. I gave up.
I will try again because maybe I wasn't patient enough to let the various threads of the film come together and stopped too soon.
I did not read the books. I watched the first installment last weekend. It was interesting. It was ok. At the end of 2, which I watched on a huge screen yesterday, I came out and said so why did any of that happen? lol My husband loved it. He read the first book when he was a teen. He was disappointed I didn’t like it. For instance references to the Great Houses. Like who are they? Do I care? 🤷♀️ At least it went by quickly and I didn’t think when will this be over. I did love Rebecca Ferguson’s performance. She was kinda scary. And now I can listen to this episode since I saw the movie!
Yeah, it's interesting, I've sometimes wondered if folks who haven't read the books could really follow what was happening (I get the sense the answer is frequently "no"). But it's hard to disentangle the two, at least in part because the movie is also very clearly in conversation with the book.
I can't directly speak to this as I have read the books, but at least for a very small anecdotal sample size, the answer was "somewhat". I had a buddy who saw the first part and quite enjoyed it. Ironically, two of his biggest complaints were things that were addressed in the book:
A) He thought that Paul was gearing up to be an action figure/fighter type, and that Timothy Chalamet looked "a bit scrawny" for that role. Book Paul is noted to be small for his age and very thin.
B) He asked where all the rest of the Atriedes were, that they seemed to just be the ruling family and soldiers in their service. He was a little surprised to hear me tell him that in the books, the Great Houses were basically occupying armies and considered themselves distinct from the people of the planets they're on.
But he did very much follow what was going on in the film and who was on which side, why characters were acting the way they did, etc.
Something I have noticed is that almost everyone who discusses this movie (and the 1st Part as well) tend to always get caught up in the novels and interpreting the films through the lens of the books. I tend to take films as they are and am indifferent to their fidelity to the source material. Is it good as a film standing on its own?
I have never read the books. I tried to watch the First installment and became quite frustrated trying to even grasp what was going on. I gave up.
I will try again because maybe I wasn't patient enough to let the various threads of the film come together and stopped too soon.
I did not read the books. I watched the first installment last weekend. It was interesting. It was ok. At the end of 2, which I watched on a huge screen yesterday, I came out and said so why did any of that happen? lol My husband loved it. He read the first book when he was a teen. He was disappointed I didn’t like it. For instance references to the Great Houses. Like who are they? Do I care? 🤷♀️ At least it went by quickly and I didn’t think when will this be over. I did love Rebecca Ferguson’s performance. She was kinda scary. And now I can listen to this episode since I saw the movie!
Yeah, it's interesting, I've sometimes wondered if folks who haven't read the books could really follow what was happening (I get the sense the answer is frequently "no"). But it's hard to disentangle the two, at least in part because the movie is also very clearly in conversation with the book.
I can't directly speak to this as I have read the books, but at least for a very small anecdotal sample size, the answer was "somewhat". I had a buddy who saw the first part and quite enjoyed it. Ironically, two of his biggest complaints were things that were addressed in the book:
A) He thought that Paul was gearing up to be an action figure/fighter type, and that Timothy Chalamet looked "a bit scrawny" for that role. Book Paul is noted to be small for his age and very thin.
B) He asked where all the rest of the Atriedes were, that they seemed to just be the ruling family and soldiers in their service. He was a little surprised to hear me tell him that in the books, the Great Houses were basically occupying armies and considered themselves distinct from the people of the planets they're on.
But he did very much follow what was going on in the film and who was on which side, why characters were acting the way they did, etc.