Dune: The Miniseries, Part II

The remarkable aspect of Part II "Maud'Dib" in the book is that it doesn't feel completely out of sync with Part I. 

It does a little (how could it not?) and frankly, I would have been okay with a novel that kept Duke Leto alive, outmaneuvered the betrayal, and outwitted the baron, all from the central palace. Religious fanatics just don't do that much for me. Paul as a kind of Prince Hal character is more my style. 

But Herbert is a skilled writer. A sense of inevitability is built into the first part, so the second and third parts follow naturally. In addition, the tone is quite similar. And an outlawed prince is a classic trope.

The TV series intelligently broke at this point (following the organization of the book). Part II opens with Paul and Jessica's escape. The joining with Stilger, the rite of passage (the duel), the exposure to new customs and values are effectively done. 

The new name is thankfully the same as in the book. Paul chooses the name of a clever mouse that jumps and survives the desert (see image below). In the 1984 movie, Paul chooses a name already replete with heroic meaning (did I mention the lack of an internal arc in the movie?). 

In fact, in general, Paul of the series gets less annoying in Part II than in Part I and far, far less annoying than Paul of the 1984 movie.

In a way, Part I relies on Paul being young and untried. Kyle MacLachlan couldn't sell this aspect of the character, and Alec Newman struggles with it. After Part I, Kyle MacLachlan turns into Warrior Man. Alec Newman turns into Confused Guy, which is preferable and closer to the book (a movie doesn't have to be close to its book, but when the book does something well, the movie's failure stands out).

However, like in the 1984 movie, Part II of the series (the post-Leto story) still falls apart. Paul is presented as rallying the Fremen to rebellion. His "rah rah" urges aren't as bad as in the 1984 movie, but the behavior is still a subtle yet irritating inaccuracy that influences the story's tone. In the book, it is Stilger who bargains for Jessica's ability, not Paul who offers it. Paul finds himself in the middle of a revolution that is already in operation. He is the catalyst because he is perceived as fulfilling prophecy. His reaction to his vision after Leto's death and to subsequent visions is less than positive. He is struggling against a current. 

All I can suppose is that presenting montages of soldiers being trained is easier than sitting inside Paul's head (or creating action around what is sitting inside Paul's head). But the continuity stinks--for one, Jessica is pregnant in one scene and not pregnant in the next and then pregnant again. It is noticeably weird. In addition, for a series that went out its way to focus on the emperor, the absence of Count Fenring and his lady is disappointing. I guess the writers wanted to give Princess Irulan something to do, but why not combine her with Lady Fenring to begin with? That would be interesting!   

Here is where I get really irritated. I am a big believer that movies/series should not be slideshows of books--they should make changes (combine Princess Irulan with Lady Fenring, for instance) and reflect a different vision. But when the author does something right and the movie/series writers fail to recognize what the author does right, it's irritating. Herbert presses a great deal of action into Part II, including Paul taking on the responsibilities of Usul's boys and Jessica becoming the Reverend Mother. 

I can understand the series writers getting rid of Usul's boys (polygamy, even unconsummated, is a hard sell, says this product of ancestral polygamy). But moving the accession of Jessica out of Part II results in a sagging Part II. It starts out strong. It ends weak.

I also have one utterly unfair complaint. The actors all look so....hydrated! Fleshy. Well-fed. Well-watered. 

The Fremen of the book are tough and sinewy. And Herbert, without downplaying their attractiveness, sells their basic borderline comparative poverty. The reason Liet and then Paul want to terraform Dune is because it is a horrible place to live. Lack of resources just ain't that much fun. 

I understand that in a future book (or movie) some Fremen resent Paul's plans and the dissolution of their water-less culture. I find this entirely believable! Doesn't change the fact that constantly hunting for water is a less than tolerable way to live. 

With both the movie and the series, simply looking at the beautiful, non-starving actors, I couldn't help but think, "Seriously, folks, what's all the fuss about?"   

Timothee Chalamet always kind of looks pared down to his bones--but photo stills of the upcoming movie don't encourage me to believe that this issue has been solved for the Fremen in general. 

I guess most actors aren't willing to starve themselves for a part like Donnie W.