In the Split Decision series, two of our writers face off on an Oscar-nominated movie one loves and the other doesn't. Today, Cláudio Alves and Lynn Lee discuss Dune: Part Two...

CLÁUDIO ALVES: As far as the Best Picture Oscar race is concerned, sequels are quite the rarity. Early year releases are even rarer. Yet, Dune: Part Two made it into the Academy's top ten, scoring four additional nominations - Cinematography, Production Design, Visual Effects, and Sound. Sure, by this metric, it pales in comparison to Part One, with its double-digit nods and six wins. But it's still a remarkable achievement. To be honest, I had a much better time with the sequel than with its predecessor. Part of it concerns a better grasp of what Villeneuve is doing in his adaptation of Frank Herbert's magnum opus, observing people as grains of sand in the winds of an imagined history rather than as characters. It's about the tragedy of going beyond personhood and the labor of building mythos and monuments, which results in a cold, mural-like cinematic experience that feels more coherent than its first chapter made it seem. In its alienation, I saw a purpose I didn't find in 2021.

I gather you had a different experience, Lynn. How does Dune: Part Two compare to Part One in your book?

LYNN LEE: It's funny, Cláudio - I completely agree with your assessment of what Part Two is doing, only to have the exact opposite response! To be clear, I don't hate or even dislike the film.  Quite the contrary.  I admire Villeneuve's craftsmanship and commitment to his (and I think Herbert's, though I haven't read the books) vision of Dune as ur-myth.  However, its coldness...what can I say?...left me cold.  Its alienation alienated me…