When the public saw Denis Villeneuve’s film for the first time Dunethey discovered what felt like a classic “Chosen One” saga: a young, noble hero, a new planet, and a clear, evil villain. We were ready to witness the rise of a savior. But at the moment Dune: part two reached its devastating conclusion, it was clear that it was all an illusion. Timothée Chalamet’s Paul Atreides was no longer the promised science fiction hero; it appeared as a warning that the genre had been trying to deliver for decades. As the story progressed and Paul began to make his presence intimidating, powerful and cold, it was clear that he was not the Messiah.
Frank Herbert, the author of the original 1965 novel, was notoriously troubled that readers had misinterpreted his book, celebrating Paul as a hero when it was intended as a dark, cautionary tale. Villeneuve’s adaptation is the first to truly and faithfully capture this dark and subversive theme, transforming the film from a simple sci-fi epic into an in-depth examination of how the desperate need for a savior is often what gives rise to a tyrant. This is how Dune created the most important and unforgettable anti-messiah in modern science fiction.
How Dune Turns Hero Worship Into Horror
Most science fiction epics that audiences have encountered tell the story of a hero. From Luke Skywalker to Neo, they spoke of the “chosen ones” chosen by destiny to save the world. Frank Herbert’s 1965 novel Dune begins in the same mythical way, only to brilliantly tear apart that idea. Denis Villeneuve’s film adaptation is the first to truly and faithfully capture this dark and subversive theme.
The film reveals that the prophecy of Lisan al-Gaib, the “Voice from the Outside World” who will lead the Fremen to heaven, is not a true prophecy at all. This is a “contagious superstition”, a lie planted centuries ago by the Missionaria Protectiva of the Bene Gesserit, a program designed specifically to sow myths of control over “primitive” worlds as a form of social engineering.
Whereas, by its nature and appearance, the horror of the story can manifest itself in the form of the grotesque Baron Harkonnen. However, in reality, the real terror is watching Paul and his mother, Lady Jessica, consciously and cynically use this fabricated belief to gain power. In part one, viewers see the power of the Bene Gesserit as Lady Jessica easily manipulates a crowd of Fremen through her expert use of their legends. In the second part, she is no longer a passive participant; she is an active political agent.
After drinking the Water of Life and becoming Reverend Mother, she begins a relentless campaign to “sow” the faith, whispering to the Fremen fundamentalists of the south that her son is the one they have been waiting for. She’s not just following a prophecy; she succeeds. The moral center of the film, Chani, sees this manipulation for what it is and says the entire thesis of the film in a single line: “This prophecy is how they enslave us!” »
The story is no longer about a battle against an alien monster; it is about a community forced to face the monstrous consequences of its own beliefs. Paul’s journey in part two is not about fulfilling a destiny, but about surrendering to a lie. When he finally assumes his role as messiah, it is only revenge. There is always an underlying political and strategic choice behind each of Paul’s actions. He understands that to regain what he lost, he must make a deal with destiny and play according to what people want. This is why his final decision is so frightening.
Paul not only accepts the Fremen faith; he consciously uses it as a weapon to launch his holy war against the emperor. Villeneuve’s vision turns the final act of the film into a tragedy because, ultimately, this is what Herbert warned against in his stories. The price of greatness is higher than it seems. “Messiahs” often use their power to corrupt and weaponize religion. They are aware that everything depends on people’s belief and faith, and that is the central point where their own gain will begin.
The most compelling evidence is that Paul knew the danger all along. In the book, he recalls a Bene Gesserit proverb his mother once quoted to him: “When religion and politics ride in the same chariot, the riders believe that nothing can stand in their way. Their movements rush forward – faster and faster. They put aside all thoughts of obstacles and forget that the precipice only shows itself to man in a blind race when it is too late.” He knew exactly what he was triggering, and he did it anyway.
Chalamet’s performance in Dune is transformative
Timothée Chalamet’s Paul Atreides is the first science fiction protagonist in years to use vulnerability as a weapon. He’s not a confident hero; he harbors anger and anger, but initially he appears as a young prince weighed down by trauma. When the audience first meets him, he is fragile, observant, and quietly burdened by prophetic dreams he cannot control. His power is not a gift; it’s a curse. And it is this very sensitivity which ends up condemning him.
It is therefore in this complexity that Chalamet’s craft shines gloriously. His performance embodied the terrifying corrosion of empathy. Viewers see his true love and compassion for the Fremen people slowly transform and evolve into a sense of divine control. He goes from being a student of their culture to being the leader of their holy war.
Paul’s journey through the first two Dune The films are one of the most difficult character arcs in modern science fiction, and Chalamet navigates it with remarkable, subtle power. Her performance is a study in how to convey massive internal conflict, often through nothing more than the look in her eyes. This is never more evident than in the film’s first major test: Gom Jabbar.
This scene will go down in history as a reference in terms of controlled suffering. His intensity is palpable, often leaving the theater audience in absolute silence. Chalamet’s performance is so convincing that fans forget they’re watching an actor pretending to feel pain in an empty box. The genius is in his reaction.
As he endures the pain inflicted by the box, his head is initially bowed in submission. But as he inwardly recites the Litany Against Fear, an act mirrored by his terrified mother, Jessica, on the other side of the door, a change occurs. The pain turns into cold anger. He slowly raises his head, meeting Reverend Mother’s gaze with a furious look that shows he is in complete control.
In Dune: part twothis movement inestifies and takes the form of a figure which is not there to bow but to make others bend. The turning point comes after he drinks the Water of Life, a moment that transforms him from a reluctant boy into a towering leader. The quiet, introspective boy is gone, replaced by a man who exudes an almost terrifying authority. The change is most visible in his eyes. When he delivers the film’s most powerful speech to the Fremen council, his gaze is no longer questioning; it’s imposing.
Director Denis Villeneuve has spoken of Chalamet’s incredible intelligence and maturity, and moviegoers can see it in his performance. He is physically not an intimidating figure in the traditional sense, but his ability to hold power through his eyes, command, and inner strength is how he makes the audience believe that Paul has seen the passage of all time and is now burdened by his terrible knowledge. Villeneuve, in an interview, described Chalamet’s evolution from Part 1 to Part 2 as follows:
“In the second part, he came in with a lot more experience and we were very excited about what awaited us with Paul’s journey. Timothée couldn’t wait to implode or explode on camera. I’m very proud.”
The Dune of Villeneuve changed the language of destiny
David Lynch’s 1984 film missed the point Dune and transformed Paul into a magical savior who makes it rain; Denis Villeneuve’s adaptation tells a cautionary tale for a modern audience who have been raised on cinema messiahs. that of Villeneuve Dune takes the comfortable “superhero to the rescue” story and completely rejects it. This suggests that the most dangerous stories are the ones people believe too deeply.
The film’s final, devastating scene closes the door on Paul’s time as a “hero.” The film shows fans that this “victory” is actually a tragedy. This is what makes the film so relatable and frightening. Paul’s rise to power is a terrifying mirror of the cult of personality seen in modern political and cultural landscapes. It’s a powerful exploration of how easily charisma becomes control and how quickly belief can turn into blind obedience. By making the “chosen one” a villain in disguise, Dune may have quietly killed the simple savior narrative for good.
Dune is, at its core, the story of how a messiah becomes an anti-messiah, and audiences have so far only witnessed the first half of that journey. The third film is expected to bring this terrifying and tragic arc to a conclusion, giving Chalamet the rare opportunity to make cinema history by completing one of the most complex anti-hero sagas ever brought to the screen.
Dune: part two
- Release date
-
February 27, 2024
- Runtime
-
167 minutes
- Director
-
Denis Villeneuve
- Writers
-
Denis Villeneuve, Jon Spaihts, Frank Herbert
-
Timothée Chalamet
Paul Atreides
-
