Denis Villeneuve’s “Dune: Part Two” premiered in theaters March 1, 2024. The story is a direct continuation of the 2021 film, picking up immediately where the first part left off. Throughout the film, several plot lines are satisfactorily resolved, while new questions have opened by the end of the story.
However, the most visually striking decision in the film is the strategic use of black-and-white — rather than a color medium — during one of the film’s key sequences.
One of the main things I appreciated about watching “Dune: Part Two” was the consistent visual appeal. Much of the action takes place on a nearly monochrome desert planet, but the camera work and an eye for unique geography succeed in making the endless waves of sand on Arrakis continuously interesting. However, the most visually striking decision in the film is the strategic use of black-and-white — rather than a color medium — during one of the film’s key sequences. After the warmth and color of the desert, the choice to film in black and white muted unnecessary details of the sequence and elevated an overwhelming sense of alien-ness.
Furthermore, I found “Dune: Part Two” to be an effective retelling of the original novel by Frank Herbert. Fidelity to the story isn’t perfect, and I would have liked to see some of the characters with bigger roles in the novel be more fully fleshed out on screen. Nevertheless, I understand why the directors made the streamlining decisions they did. I was also glad to see that while “Dune” and “Dune: Part Two” meshed neatly together, the second part continued to advance the plot line.
Although I was impressed by this film overall, one major shortcoming lies in the treatment of the main villains in House Harkonnen. Similarly to their arc in the novel, antagonism from House Harkonnen undergoes a major pivot over the course of Part II. However, the novel illustrates this change as one full of guile and political intrigue, while the movie chose to merely increase the Harkonnens’ animalistic brutality. The change flattened a compelling villain from the novel and taught me to expect nothing other than senseless killing when they were on screen, instead of provoking interest in the antagonists as characters. In a film with such a strong grasp of the original story, this decision makes almost no sense.
All in all, “Dune: Part Two” is worth a watch, and the experience of watching it in the theater accentuates the film’s cinematic qualities. However, before going to watch “Dune: Part Two,” please remember that it’s part of a cohesive story and should not be watched without seeing Part I first. If you’ve already seen Part One, I’d recommend refreshing your memory and rewatching it before going to the theater.