Has splitting Dune into two parts potentially confused the message of the sci-fi epic? If you hadn’t read Dune – the 1965 novel by Frank Herbert – and only watched the first movie, you might come away thinking that Paul Atreides is a straightforward, positive hero. After all, he’s charismatic, empathetic, and seems to have unnatural, mystical powers. Paul checks many of the boxes of the noble protagonist chosen to lead. But some of Paul’s prescient visions of the future hint at future disaster. And fans of Herbert’s writing will know that things aren’t so simple — the further we get in the series, the more complicated, and even villainous, Paul becomes.
To be fair, the novel was also originally published as serials, but its two sections were released as a number of parts over time, making it easier for viewers to track complex, ambiguous developments– more like the experience of TV installments than the singular emotional arc and thematic feel of a film you watch all at once. So what’s the effect of director Denis Villeneuve dividing this narrative in two, and what hints do we get about what’s to come? Here’s our take.
A Supposed Hero
For most of Dune: Part 1’s run, Paul appears to be a straightforwardly heroic protagonist. We’re inclined to be sympathetic to him, since he’s thrust into the intrigue surrounding Arrakis, the Galactic Empire, and the value of the spice simply because of his family — it’s not his fault that seemingly everyone in the galaxy will kill for spice. Many of Dune’s most iconic moments showcase Paul persevering under extraordinary pressure, and proving himself as a hero. He endures the test of the gom jabbar, proving that he is able to handle a superhuman amount of pain. Eventually, when his mother Jessica is challenged, Paul triumphs in his duel with the Fremen Jamis, proving that he can also fight. And as Paul is exposed to the spice, he displays abilities and premonitions that mark him as special.
More than that, from the beginning of the movie Villeneuve establishes that Paul is kind — or at least tries to be. In this respect, he mirrors his role model and biggest motivator: his father, Duke Leto. In their first discussion of their impending trip to Arrakis, Paul recoils at the possibility that his family might oppress the Fremen, only to discover that his father wants to treat them as equals. During a storm that When a sandworm threatens to destroy the Atreides’ spice harvesting equipment, Leto acts to protect the most people, rather than valuing the wealth he could be extracting from the planet. Paul mirrors this commitment to the Fremen when he asks to join them at the end of the movie, setting up a part two where he is fully integrated into their society as a leader.
It makes sense that Dune tries to establish Paul as a hero: Getting us invested in the idea of Paul as a hero makes us more susceptible to the eventual revelation of what Paul does with his power – hopefully leading us to question our own attachment to similar mythical “chosen one” figures as infallible idols. But counting on complicating our assumptions later can be a little risky, especially for readers or viewers who are already inclined to want to be Paul. Villeneuve said he “strongly identified” with Paul when he first encountered the novel as a teenager. The overall effect of these choices in the first part of Dune is to make us root for Paul, the person at the center of the story and who is on-screen for almost the entire movie. We want to follow him, and see where he goes next. Even when, as it turns out, it seems like his success may mean death for billions of people.
The Danger of Prophecy
Spoiler warning for the Dune books and, presumably, upcoming Dune films: As Muad’dib, the leader of the Fremen, Paul takes over Arrakis and becomes Emperor. Sounds good, except that he also leads a galactic holy war, a jihad that claims billions of lives. The next several novels in the series — Children of Dune and Dune Messiah, which follow the rest of Paul’s life, and God Emperor of Dune, which follows his son Leto II — subvert the simplistic hero narrative, and explore the seismic costs of trusting too dogmatically in any one leader. As Frank Herbert’s biographer put it, “Personal observation had convinced Herbert that in the power arena of politics/economics and in their logical consequence, war, people tend to give over every decision-making capacity to any leader who could wrap himself in the myth fabric of society,” — a process that tends to lead to disaster. Still, that shouldn’t be such a big surprise to anyone who’s watching the first movie closely — since director Denis Villeneuve takes pains to set up what’s to come, especially in a series of visions Paul has in the desert.
Though we don’t see the holy war itself, we see the way the Bene Gesserit have inadvertently laid the groundwork for what is coming — the mysterious order has not only established the breeding program that produced Paul, but has also set up a series of religious beliefs on Arrakis that will confirm him as a Messiah. Once Paul arrives on Arrakis, he neatly fits into the myth prepared by the Bene Gesserit. The beliefs of the Fremen may or may not be true, but it doesn’t matter: the Fremen will fight and die for those beliefs either way. And though we spend most of the first movie with Paul and Jessica, we do get occasional moments with ordinary Fremen, which give us a glimpse of how real people are being manipulated by the story Paul uses to his own advantage. Eventually, Paul accepts his destiny, and decides to use the Bene Gesserit’s expectations for his own ends, implicitly also accepting the consequences.
Villeneueve takes pains to make Dune Part One Paul’s story, and present him as heroic. But, like Herbert does in the novel, he also includes the seeds of what will eventually happen to Paul. At the very beginning of the movie, Zendaya’s Chani sets the stage for what’s to come, establishing that the Harkonnens have been removed from the valuable planet Arrakis. After the title card, the next thing we see is Paul’s face — a notable cut to the next oppressor of the Fremen. Paul’s visions do, on some level, continue the epic feeling of his hero narrative, especially when we see a future version of him leading the Fremen. But all of the other choices Villenueve makes in this sequence are designed to horrify Paul and us, confirming Herbert’s contention that a sufficiently charismatic leader lights a fire under his forces that not even he can control.
In this respect, Paul reminds us of another prophesied hero who eventually unleashed violence on their people, and who disappointed legions of fans in the process: Daenerys Targaryen. Daenerys is similarly the heir to a powerful family that’s been wronged, someone who inspires hope and faith through almost godlike power, but then becomes fixated on revenge, cloaked in a veneer of righteousness. Like for Paul, the seeds were there for Dany’s downfall from early in the series — but they weren’t underlined enough for most audiences, and when she did descend into madness and evil, people found the transition too abrupt and poorly fleshed-out.
Ideally, Dune Part Two will do a better job with its execution. Still, we also have to wonder if the outrage over Dany’s change was primarily due to so many seasons where audiences had invested in her as a magical hero and savior – much like Paul begins as. When we put so much of ourselves into a character like that, how willing are we to accept the later truth that we were wrong?
Moreover, how will viewers feel who simply watch Dune Part One and stop, without engaging in the future of the franchise? Will they simply see Paul’s story as a narrative of a boy overcoming adversity and bravely choosing his destiny – since the movie ends with him deliberately pursuing the role he initially feared? And in the gap between the two movies’ release, is there a risk that fans will become too attached to the simpler, more aspirational version of Paul, so that they’ll resist fully grasping the subversion in his future?
Villeneuve’s movies differ from the earlier 1984 filmed version of Dune, which tries to condense the entire novel into its runtime. The pressure to fit so much material in led director David Lynch to substantially deviate from Herbert’s novel, and Lynch himself has said he was “sickened” with how the movie came out. Villeneuve, more interested in faithfully adapting the book, made different choices, and described his mixed feelings about the Lynch movie. “I did feel that he succeeded in some areas, and other moments of the adaptation I felt he went away from the source material a bit too much.”
So arguably, there is an importance to having the time to flesh out the earlier parts of Paul’s story as it’s developed in the book, and in that way having the running time of two movies could really help.
Conclusion
In the same way that the people of Arrakis have been prepared for Paul’s coming, we the audience have been prepared by a long history of narratives about chosen, prophesied heroes. Whether it’s modern fictional superheroes, the myth of King Arthur, or even many major religions, there’s a certain archetype we’re primed to respond to—and movie star Timothee Chalamet as Paul fits the bill perfectly. At first, like many other “chosen one” heroes, Paul resists this archetype. But nearly everyone else expects him to be that kind of character — including the other Bene Gesserit, the Fremen, and his teachers. And eventually Paul decides to be what everyone expects from him, even though he knows it’s not really true. (In the later books, he feels deeply conflicted about creating and maintaining this image of himself.)
So while in most chosen one stories, the hero overcoming his doubts is just a step in the plot leading to the good stuff, here we’re given the sense that maybe he should have listened to those doubts after all.
Pushing us to an endpoint of questioning this whole all-powerful chosen one myth is what’s ultimately powerful about Dune — and getting us wrapped up in the aura of Paul is a necessary first step. Still, once we get Dune Part Two, we’ll see if the franchise can pull off this shift and bring its audiences along for the full journey.
SOURCES
Jolin, Dan. “Denis Villeneuve Talks ‘Taxing’ ‘Dune’ Shoot, Identifying with Paul Atreides, Sequel Plans.” Screen, 10 Jan. 2022, www.screendaily.com/features/denis-villeneuve-talks-taxing-dune-shoot-identifying-with-paul-atreides-sequel-plans/5166312.article.
Liptak, Andrew. “Why Timothée Chalamet’s Dune Character Paul Is an Actor’s Dream Role.” Polygon, 9 Sept. 2020, www.polygon.com/21426684/timothee-chalamet-dune-2020-character-paul-explained.
Lattanzio, Ryan. “Talk ‘Dune’ with David Lynch? Denis Villeneuve Says He Doesn’t Expect to Have That Chance.” IndieWire, 9 Oct. 2021, www.indiewire.com/2021/10/denis-villeneuve-david-lynch-dune-1234670662/.