A Potpourri of Vestiges Review
Murtaza Ali Khan
The
biggest question surrounding any adaptation of Dune is whether it can match
Frank Herbert's literary genius which makes Dune one of the best science-fiction
novels of all time. The new Denis Villeneuve adaptation of Dune has given rise
to the same old question. Can Villeneuve’s showmanship match Herbert’s
penmanship? But before we try to address that let’s first look at the Dune’s
basic storyline. Set in the distant future, the story of Dune follows young
Paul Atreides, whose family accepts the stewardship of the planet Arrakis,
despite knowing that it is an inhospitable and sparsely populated desert
wasteland full of dangers. Arrakis, also known as Dune, is the only source of
melange or spice—a drug that’s said to extend life and enhance mental abilities
and which is also necessary for space travel as it requires a kind of
multidimensional awareness and foresight that only the consumption of the drug
can provide to the person who consume. Herbert’s original novel explores the complex
interplay of politics, economics, religion, ecology, technology, and human feelings,
as the various factions of the empire confront each other in a struggle for the
control of Arrakis and its spice.
It wouldn’t really be wrong
to describe Frank Herbert’s Dune is an epic saga about the futuristic
inter-planetary feudalism. It's such an iconic work of literature that almost
everything we see today in the science fiction films, starting with Star Wars,
is directly or indirectly inspired by Dune. Despite the Sci-Fi setup, at its
core, it is mostly about family feuds and rivalries triggered by the prestige
and fortune associated with the mining and managing spice production is
considered a coveted task, but also a difficult one, owing to factors mentioned
above. Now, many parallels can be drawn to precious commodities on earth and as
resources deplete many similar situations are bound to arise.
All Herbert seemed
interested in at first was to write a book about sand dunes and desert ecology
but his exhaustive research pushed him to write something with far greater
scope. What makes Frank Herbert's Dune so special is how it explores a
futuristic world from the point of view of ecology, religion, human ambition,
emotional drives, and the incessant struggle for survival.
Adapting Dune is looked upon
as suicide and many legendary filmmakers have faltered in their attempts. So
Villeneuve really had his job cut out. When the film had its premiere at Venice,
many critics were raving about it. Some even went to the extent of calling it
the biggest epic since the Lord of the Rings trilogy. But one major complaint has
been that Villeneuve has only covered half the novel (more precisely 2/3rd) and
just as I write this Dune Part II has been officially announced.
The way I look at it, Villeneuve
should rather have made a 3 hour film and covered the whole novel. Yes, he has
tried his best to be loyal to the book taking care of even the minutest of
characters and subplots. But there is no much to be read between the lines,
especially with a complex novel like Dune.
The covert agenda of the
Bene Gesserits (an obvious source of inspiration for the Jedis in Star Wars),
an all-women pseudo-religious order of spies, nuns, scientists, and theologians,
who owing to their supernatural powers are equally hated and desired is at the
heart of Herbert’s story but Villeneuve’s Dune fails to explore the
sophisticated nature of the Gesserit modus operandi. The novel also explores
the idea of ‘Jihad’ at its most intellectual level, completely ripping it apart
from its conventional association with a religion in particular. Any group of
humans that fervently believes in an individual or an ideology is capable of
Jihad, a fight against evil and a struggle for justice against oppression. But,
Villeneuve's film wrongly will use the term holy war as associated with 'Crusades'
instead of 'Jihad' which owing to its Arabic roots is widely associated with
Islam when in reality it predates Islam. By eschewing from delving into the
intellectual dimensions of 'Jihad,' Villeneuve, in many ways, has done a grave
injustice to Herbert's grand intellectual vision for Dune. Clearly, Villeneuve has
failed in raising his cinematic canvas to the heights of Herbert's literary
genius. But it doesn’t really come across as a surprise. For, Villeneuve was
always bound to fail with an ambitious project like Dune.
The new rendition of Dune by
Villeneuve can best be described as a wasted opportunity. Those who haven’t seen
it yet should consider checking out the highly misunderstood 1984 version of
Dune by David Lynch instead. For, even a lesser film by a master like Lynch cannot
be overlooked. At the risk of sounding a little pessimistic, I can tell you
that when the dust finally settles, Lynch's version will ultimately emerge as
the most definitive version of Dune unless Villeneuve manages to do some
serious course correction with Dune Part II.
A version of this review was first published at The Daily Guardian.
People who liked this also liked...
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for sharing for valuable opinion. We would be delighted to have you back.