As anticipated, a thrilling watch! I enjoyed <em>'Dune'</em>, though remember thinking it was obviously a complete set-up to a sequel and that this would only improve upon its predecessor - and that's very much the case. <em>'Dune: Part Two'</em> is excellent! My interest did wane slightly at roughly the middle part, as was similarly the case with the first film in truth, but that was a feeling that only lasted for a relativiely short time. All in all, it's fantastic. The acting is top notch, the visuals are breathtaking <em>(those sandworms tho)</em> and the score is outstandingly hefty - you can always rely on the great Hans Zimmer! Timothée Chalamet stars yet again, as do the likes of Rebecca Ferguson, Zendaya, Dave Bautista & Co. The person I actually enjoyed most on screen was Javier Bardem, who is truly brilliant throughout. Bring on <em>'Dune Messiah'</em>! On that note, happy to read that director Denis Villeneuve has noted that he won't be rushing that one out - and rightly so!

r96sk
2024-03-01

An absolutely mesmerizing masterpiece, breathtaking cinematography and a spellbinding soundtrack that elevate the viewing experience to unparalleled heights. It serves as a testament to the brilliance of the book series, standing as the pinnacle of sci-fi cinema history. Thanks, Villeneuve!

biancarockr
2024-03-04

Great but a little long. Sexier than LotR and no hair. Yell acting. Jabba bathes in black goo and kills women horribly. Walken is hilarious. Zendaya still an addict. Bridges is a bit self-serious. Amazing visuals. Really enjoyed...was glad and a bit bored by the end. Shorter Dunes please.

Chandler Danier
2024-03-05

Saw it on the bigger screen, which was worth it. The worms were quite large. The movie has a great way of passing across the grand scale of the world in a way that michael bay can never understand how to do with his robots movies. It did stretch on quite a bit, looking back not even sure where all the three hours went. Its just all shaping up for the big battle with a bit of political intrigue here and there. Also, still have no idea how they get off the worms or how they load up large groups of people onto the worms, like, can they stop the worms whenever they want and let people climb on, and then giddy up, but if thats the case why dont they have stabled worms ready to go.

justhappytobehere
2024-03-23

I had to watch Dune part 1 because if I didn't, I would not have known what to expect in Dune part 2. The movie was incredible. To see it on the big screen really makes a difference. You need to see every angle possible. I understand why it needed to be that way. I loved the movie. I would watch Dune 1 and 2 over again. I didn't like the scene where Feyd-Rautha died. But it was necessry if they planned on doing a third installment for Dune. The casting for this film was picked brilliantly. It fit them like they were part of the era of Dune itself.

Roberta1970
2024-04-02

**Not bad** Overall, a nice movie. But it was not something extraordinary. The acting and direction were pretty average. There were a lot of editing mistakes. In some scenes, you feel like it was rushed. Some scenes feel like they are missing context. Some scenes are unnecessarily slow-paced. There were a lot of stupid and logical fallacies. First, they show how dangerous those 'worms' are and run for life. Then they show you can actually 'tame' them like a cowboy, but with immense difficulty. Then you see the whole clan with tents, food, luggage, etc., riding them for traveling. I literally couldn't hold my laughter. Well, in the end, I was entertained. Rating: 7/10

dumasori
2024-04-05

I remember the first film, no not the first in this contemporary series but the first attempt to bring the books, to cinema. In terms of contextual cohesiveness and pacing I feel it did a better job, than its latter day counterpart. I believe with this effort they are going for sweeping epic but somehow it comes across as inexplicably pedestrian. Yes cinematography is remarkable, as are CGI effects but the pacing is slow and things happen that don't come together all that well or give the sense that they are contributing, meaningfully, to the overall story. Acting is competent but again, its not remarkable, which I think is in part down to a lack of depth, in characterisations. I know this review probably wont be popular or reflective of the mainstream but I sense they are trying to do too much and as a consequence, achieving too little. In summary, visually compelling but lacking in a certain intensity and depth. Feels contextually spare and at times redundant, if that makes sense. Still worth a look if you liked the books.

MovieGuys
2024-04-10