Recently Director Deni Villneuve commented on his excitement and hopes for the intended
sequel of his Dune adaptation.
The result of his musings has led to some concern and some fan backlash however it is
my view that this controversy has been fueled by certain entertainment sites imputing more
than what the Director intended.
In this video I’d like to examine what Villneuve said regarding Dune part 2, and whether or
not there is a basis for this controversy and offer my thoughts regarding the plan for
the sequel.
In a recent interview with an Italian magazine Director Deni Villneuve was talking about
his highly anticipated Dune adaptation.
Deni had always intended on splitting his adaptation of Dune across two films, a wise
decision as the world building source material is very dense and it simply would not have
done the novel justice if it was condensed down to just one film.
As we are eager to hear news of Dune part 2 beginning production, Villneuve opened up
about his excitement for the sequel and the climax to Frank Herbert’s iconic story.
He was quoted saying "I can't wait to shoot the second part of
Dune to get [Timothée Chalamet and Zendaya] back together.
Knowing that in the next chapter Zendaya will be the protagonist of the story.”
To me it's exciting to hear the director talk more about his eagerness to get started on
the sequel and honestly when I first read this statement there was nothing that jumped
out at me that concerned me as it seemed to align with how the story continues.
However some took it upon themselves to imply more than what the director said.
In particular an article from Collider whose title says the Dune sequel will switch leads
to Zendaya’s Chani.
I find myself disappointed in this particular article as it seems like nothing but a cheap
attempt to get clicks and drum up controversy.
For one, the director never said that Timothy Chalamet’s Paul Atreides would be swapped
out as the lead for Zendaya’s character as the title of their headline asserts.
In fact the director first comments on how he can’t wait to see Chalamet and Zendaya
back together again for the sequel so the implication that Villneuve intends to diminish
Paul Atreides and his part of the story in order to give that attention and focus on
Chani doesn’t make sense and is very misleading.
Secondly, Villneuve’s statement about Chani being the protagonist in the next chapter
of the story is actually in line with how the story of Dune unfolds.
She has a much more significant part to play in the latter portion of Dune as opposed to
the first portion as the latter half of the book takes place after Paul has integrated
himself among the Fremen people.
So naturally there is more of a focus on Chani, a Fremen warrior with a special relationship
with Paul.
His statement is accurate when it comes to Chani’s story arc but I’d also like to
consider the possible ramifications for the rest of the characters as is presented in
the director’s statement.
Some have embraced the idea of Chani being the main lead of Dune part 2 while also implying
that Paul’s complex story arc makes him less of a protagonist.
I’m not sure that is entirely what Villneuve meant to say.
While it is clear that Chani is very much a main character especially when just considering
the latter portion of the novel she is not the only one.
Paul, Lady Jessica, Stilgar and Chani all have significant parts to play as the story
continues Any attempt to diminish Paul’s contribution in order to give Chani more to
do would not only be unnecessary but would greatly deviate from the source material which
I don’t think is Villneuve’s intention considering how much he’s stated his desire
to create a faithful adaptation of the novel.
I’d also like to point out that the definition of protagonist means the leading character
or one of the major characters in a drama, movie, novel, or other fictional text.
It doesn’t imply hero or villain status, it is simply a term that describes how significant
a certain character is to the story.
I will concede that Villneuve did say in his statement that Chani would be the protagonist
and not a protagonist and so I think this is the reason for the misleading articles
reacting to this news.
When considering the entire situation it makes much more sense that this is simply a matter
of a statement getting a little lost in translation as I’m unsure in what language this interview
was done.
Regardless neither italian nor english are the director’s first language.
And If you’ve seen any interviews with him expressing his thoughts in a language that
is not his mother tongue you need to take into consideration the context of his comments
to get an accurate sense of what he is trying to convey.
I think this is the case here while Chani is in the first part of the two part adaptation
it is more in line with a supporting role and so I think the director is simply taking
note of this fact and how excited he is for her to be reunited with her co-star Chalamet
considering the significant part she’ll have to play as the sci-fi epic continues.
I’d also like to point out that the story of Dune is made up of more than just one person.
Just looking at the first novel in Frank Herbert’s six book saga is filled with a large assortment
of characters and even those with a smaller part that could be considered a supporting
role by film standards have a deep meaningful impact in the outworking of the story.
Chani’s part in the first part of this adaptation while a supporting role is vital to the Dune
Saga.
I’ve said before that if Zendaya’s Chani is anything like how she’s written in the
novel she’ll leave her mark to be remembered.
From Villneuve’s comments about her performance it seems like that this is true and I can’t
blame the director for his eagerness to see the rest of the character arc play out.
In this same interview Deni also emphasized how important women were to the Dune saga.
While this portion wasn’t highlighted in many articles covering this story it could
have played a part in the continuation of this controversy.
I completely agree with his statement, however, the same can also be said of the men in this
story.
I think the way Frank Herbert crafted this story gives proper weight to both groups and
I strongly believe that each of these characters can stand on their own as they are written
without having to diminish the role of another.
Considering what Deni has done with the character of Duncan Idaho it seems his role will be
focused on more than it has in previous adaptations.
Strictly speaking Duncan has only a few scenes depicted in the novel however his actions,
while not always seen from a character’s viewpoint are talked about by others and so
there is a basis for Duncan to be featured in more scenes in this visual format of storytelling.
But it doesn’t seem that his expanded role will come at the cost of another character’s
contributions.
There’s plenty of story and world building to go around.
In the same way I feel it makes sense for Zenday’s contribution to be emphasized in
the first film as well and especially going forward in the sequel as her part of the story
continues to grow.
Considering the fact that Dune part 2 hasn’t been officially greenlit yet I do feel that
any strong reactions to the director’s comments here are a bit premature.
Hopefully we’ll hear news soon about production getting underway for said sequel so we can
see Deni Villeneuve’s complete vision of Frank Herbert’s Dune.
But I’m curious to know what you think about this controversy regarding the Dune director’s
statement?
Is the controversy warranted or is this simply a matter of making something out of nothing?
Could both be true?
Let me know your thoughts in the comments in the section below.
I hope you enjoyed this video.
Leave a like if you did and be sure to subscribe for more Dune and other sci-fi and fantasy
news and lore.
Thank you all so much for your support and as always have a very nerdy day.