Quick Review: Visually sweeping, and so grand, it's overwhelming to take in all the otherworldly imagery and majestically sandy scenery, yet lifeless, uneventful, dry in tone, and sluggish in pace, Villeneuve's vastly ambitious space opera with political essence is a technical prodigy that also flaunts a stellar cast, but being 'only the beginning', "Dune: Part I" feels exactly like one, as its flatlined prologue-like story devoid of thrills, soul, action and epicness is easy to devour, but not to digest.
4 comments:
Another blogger buddy liked it a lot more, but he said the part I was a big letdown. Is it better than the 80's one? That's what matters.
Alex, actually the entire movie is Part I. I don't remember much from Lynch's Dune, but this one was a cure for insomnia really. Lol
We will agree to disagree on this one - I thought the deliberate pacing allowed time for the movie to breathe and establish mood/tone. The quiet parts were as effective as the explosive moments. The director did an excellent job with Blade Runner 2049, Arrival, and Sicario, and this film was no different - exactly what I expected.
Each to their own, I guess. I found it monotonous and lifeless. It's essentially half a movie, and it felt like one. It was building and building to basically nothing.
Post a Comment