Dune: Part Two (2024) (2 Viewers)

[Jake Lipson]

Well, it happened. Dune Part Two has taken a week to pass the entire domestic gross of Part One. Part One made $108 million in its original release, plus another $1 million or so in its February re-release to tee up Part Two. Part Two is now at $111 million domestically through Thursday.

This is what happens when you don't put your movie on streaming simultaneously with a theatrical release.

 

[Tino]

Looking at a 50% drop this weekend. Which is pretty good.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Well, it happened. Dune Part Two has taken a week to pass the entire domestic gross of Part One. Part One made $108 million in its original release, plus another $1 million or so in its February re-release to tee up Part Two. Part Two is now at $111 million domestically through Thursday.

This is what happens when you don't put your movie on streaming simultaneously with a theatrical release.

To be fair, I'm sure there's more build-up for Dune 2 than could possibly be for Dune 1, including w/ help from the Dune 1 re-release. Plus the Oppy/Barbenheimer run and re-release (along w/ Tenet too) might possibly have also benefited Dune 2 w/ helping getting more people back into going to such films to this degree, particularly on the premium screens -- I think we're seeing the kind of advanced ticketing that we didn't really used to before Oppy... probably not even for Avengers: Endgame IIRC (as I don't recall having remotely as much trouble getting tix for the Lincoln Square IMAX for that)...

I suppose one might also argue that No Way Home and TG: Maverick also helped pave the way before Oppy (although NWH was different enough and much closer in timing to Dune 1)...

_Man_

 

[Patrick Sun]

Used my AMC A-list to throw some more $$$ towards D2's box office tonight. I think I like the Dolby Cinema presentation a little more than the Faux-MAX presentation, just for the wider aspect ratio for this kind of film, more scope for its landscape shots.

 

[Jake Lipson]

 

[AlexF]

Used my AMC A-list to throw some more $$$ towards D2's box office tonight. I think I like the Dolby Cinema presentation a little more than the Faux-MAX presentation, just for the wider aspect ratio for this kind of film, more scope for its landscape shots.

I fully agree.

I found the wider ratio worked far better to give me that epic feel. I, like some others, found the 1.90:1 ration a bit too claustrophobic at times. I'm disappointed that the closest 1.43:1/VAR is 2+h away from me.

I've thrown three showings at it so far. A last minute spur of the moment Saturday viewing last week, then IMAX on Sunday with my youngest, then Dolby AVX with the gf's family on Tuesday.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I fully agree.

I found the wider ratio worked far better to give me that epic feel. I, like some others, found the 1.90:1 ration a bit too claustrophobic at times. I'm disappointed that the closest 1.43:1/VAR is 2+h away from me.

I've thrown three showings at it so far. A last minute spur of the moment Saturday viewing last week, then IMAX on Sunday with my youngest, then Dolby AVX with the gf's family on Tuesday.

Claustrophobic?

Isn't the IMAX 1.9:1 AR more open, not tighter than the scope version?

I might give Dolby Cinema a try as well next Tues or Wed probably for a matinee w/ my A-List. Might as well have a look-see at what likely to expect for the 4K disc release...

_Man_

 

[Jake Lipson]

I saw the film again today. Naturally, there wasn't quite as much energy in the room as the first time with a full house on opening night. But I am happy to say that it really holds up to rewatching.

This time, I went to it without rewatching Part One immediately before in order to see if that would change the experience. Of course, I know what happens in Part One and saw it twice last month. But it still felt kind of strange not to watch them as a pair. They really do work best as one experience.

It occurred to me that the opening voiceover from Florence Pugh could be considered an attempt to tell the audience what happened in the last film in case people hadn't seen that one. She explains that the Harkonen takeover of Arrakis happened overnight and that by morning, House Abrades was no more. She also says that the Harkonen have done her father's dirty work. That is a really threadbare summary of the events of the first film, but it technically is one. I wouldn't advise anyone to see this film without the first one. I also don't know how many people would be interested in this one without the first one. But that opening feels like an olive branch in case there are any such people.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I saw the film again today. Naturally, there wasn't quite as much energy in the room as the first time with a full house on opening night. But I am happy to say that it really holds up to rewatching.

This time, I went to it without rewatching Part One immediately before in order to see if that would change the experience. Of course, I know what happens in Part One and saw it twice last month. But it still felt kind of strange not to watch them as a pair. They really do work best as one experience.

It occurred to me that the opening voiceover from Florence Pugh could be considered an attempt to tell the audience what happened in the last film in case people hadn't seen that one. She explains that the Harkonen takeover of Arrakis happened overnight and that by morning, House Abrades was no more. She also says that the Harkonen have done her father's dirty work. That is a really threadbare summary of the events of the first film, but it technically is one. I wouldn't advise anyone to see this film without the first one. I also don't know how many people would be interested in this one without the first one. But that opening feels like an olive branch in case there are any such people.

I doubt it's any kinda olive branch. It's just a very brief recap/refresher reasonably well done just to help everyone dive right back into the story.

Frankly, anyone going to see a (obviously highly anticipated no less) movie entitled something Part 2 has gotta know/realize they shoulda seen the first/previous movie first, LOL.

IF they choose to see this w/out bothering w/ the first movie, that's on them.

_Man_

 

[Jake Lipson]

IF they choose to see this w/out bothering w/ the first movie, that's on them.

I agree. But Villeneuve has said in interviews that he wanted to make a movie that worked on its own for people who didn't see Part One to be able to understand it.

I'm not sure how successful he was or wasn't in that endeavor because everyone I know who has seen this one has also seen Part One. I suppose it would be interesting to see what someone new would think of it, but I wouldn't actually recommend to anyone that they start with Part Two in order to find out.

Even if Florence Pugh's opening narration covers the broadest strokes, there are still things in the film that clearly require knowledge of the previous one to understand.

For example,

Spoiler

Margot testing Feyd-Rautha with the box comes to mind. She says, "Put your hand in the box" and you see the needle pointing at his neck. But then the film cuts away. It makes no attempt to explain what any of that is or what it means because the movie is assuming the audience already knows this from having watched the similar scene with Paul being tested in the same manner in the previous film. Anyone else wouldn't have the foggiest idea what is going on there. I'm not saying it needed to be shown again. I think this was the right thing to do. But it wouldn't make sense to newbies, despite Villeneuve's stated intention for Part Two to be standalone.

 

[Joe Wong]

Down only 44%. A very good hold.

 

[Wes Candela]

To be fair, I'm sure there's more build-up for Dune 2 than could possibly be for Dune 1, including w/ help from the Dune 1 re-release. Plus the Oppy/Barbenheimer run and re-release (along w/ Tenet too) might possibly have also benefited Dune 2 w/ helping getting more people back into going to such films to this degree, particularly on the premium screens -- I think we're seeing the kind of advanced ticketing that we didn't really used to before Oppy... probably not even for Avengers: Endgame IIRC (as I don't recall having remotely as much trouble getting tix for the Lincoln Square IMAX for that)...

I suppose one might also argue that No Way Home and TG: Maverick also helped pave the way before Oppy (although NWH was different enough and much closer in timing to Dune 1)...

_Man_

i’m going to agree completely with everything you just wrote.
Oppy/ Barbie
Top Gun 2
Dune Rereleased,

and great advertising.
I think, without the pandemic looming over our heads along with the very sudden ending to part one and those of us that know how much of a story is left in the first book

Along with all of the sequences and footage that we’ve seen in advance… This is all helping Dune Part Two become a behemoth.

 

[Wes Candela]

Down only 44%. A very good hold.

agreed brother Joe and honestly, I think it’s going to be the international numbers that are going to push this baby to 1 billion worldwide

that being said it might only get to 800,000 but it’s the optics. This is big theatrical filmmaking that moviegoers have missed so much.

It’s just fantastic seeing people go back to the theater like this

 

[Wes Candela]

I saw the film again today. Naturally, there wasn't quite as much energy in the room as the first time with a full house on opening night. But I am happy to say that it really holds up to rewatching.

This time, I went to it without rewatching Part One immediately before in order to see if that would change the experience. Of course, I know what happens in Part One and saw it twice last month. But it still felt kind of strange not to watch them as a pair. They really do work best as one experience.

It occurred to me that the opening voiceover from Florence Pugh could be considered an attempt to tell the audience what happened in the last film in case people hadn't seen that one. She explains that the Harkonen takeover of Arrakis happened overnight and that by morning, House Abrades was no more. She also says that the Harkonen have done her father's dirty work. That is a really threadbare summary of the events of the first film, but it technically is one. I wouldn't advise anyone to see this film without the first one. I also don't know how many people would be interested in this one without the first one. But that opening feels like an olive branch in case there are any such people.

Very well said.

 

[AlexF]

Claustrophobic?

Isn't the IMAX 1.9:1 AR more open, not tighter than the scope version?

The open scenes were more open, yes, but any time it was closer in on the characters, I found it a much more claustrophobic feel in the sense that the face/shoulders took up the entire screen, whereas in the wider AR, there was space on either side of them to make it feel a bit more open.

If that makes sense.

 

[Patrick Sun]

When the AR is wider, your eyes will go left and right to take in the image on the screen. When the AR is taller, the image feels zoomed in and your eyes are more static while watching the film, giving that claustrophobic feel at times with the close-ups.

 

[Wes Candela]

When the AR is wider, your eyes will go left and right to take in the image on the screen. When the AR is taller, the image feels zoomed in and your eyes are more static while watching the film, giving that claustrophobic feel at times with the close-ups.

So true. the different effects of aspect ratios on our minds.

IMAX AR affects our minds differently than what we have been conditioned to be comfortable with in a movie theater (16.9 or 2.39).

In fact, we are reverting back to the television aspect ratio format of 4x3, except theatrically and on a grand canvas.
it's wondrous.
It changes what's possible to capture from the viewpoint of the director of photography and the director to what we, the audience, will experience.

Great, great point.

 

[Wes Candela]

Used my AMC A-list to throw some more $$$ towards D2's box office tonight. I think I like the Dolby Cinema presentation a little more than the Faux-MAX presentation, just for the wider aspect ratio for this kind of film, more scope for its landscape shots.

I appreciated the movie as it is, but that being said, you make an excellent point.

I'm a massive fan of widescreen panoramic shots or aspect ratios, and IMAX is quite a change.

Keeping that in mind, I find each to be so powerful when utilized by the Director to tell their story visually.

I am learning to adapt to each aspect ratio, because each serves its own purpose and affects me differently

 

[Jeff Cooper]

Something I neglected to mention about the IMAX showing I attended yesterday - we took our seats about 20 minutes before showtime and NOTHING was playing on the screen. No ads, no promos, just some light classical music on the sound system. When showtime rolled around a theater employee got on the microphone, welcomed everyone to the movie, and laid down a few rules. Then the film started right away with NO trailers at all, just the IMAX countdown leader. HOW NICE! It really did feel strange not having all of that baggage attached to the experience, but I liked it.

I wish! I got tickets for the "IMAX" showing and arrived to find it to be a lie-max theater. Not a true IMAX screen at all. I arrived before the start time, because thinking this would be IMAX I expected it to be like your experience. Commercials before the feature were playing on a loop and we saw each one twice. Then once showtime passed they proceeded to play 32(!) minutes of previews and more AMC ads. After all that, and the movie finally started playing, the baby in the corner of the theater started crying. This is why I have a f'king home theater.

Fantastic film though!

 

[Tino]

I got tickets for the "IMAX" showing and arrived to find it to be a lie-max theater. Not a true IMAX screen at all.

You didn’t know that beforehand?