Timothée Chalamet did not receive an Oscar nomination because he was nominated for a far inferior performance for portraying Paul Atreides in Dune Part II.
Dune Part II continues the story of the first film where we open with Paul now in the desert of Arrakis with his pregnant mother (Rebecca Ferguson) and guided by the native Fremen including Stilgar (Javier Bardem) and Chani (Zendaya). Where the first film follows Paul through his traditional hero’s journey of the young man who has yet to prove himself by being thrown into hell as his family is destroyed by the villainous Harkonnens. He ended there after proving some minor measure by surviving the attack of the Harkonnen forces and by successfully killing a Fremen who had challenged him to a duel, allowing himself to become part of their group at least tentatively. We pick up just after this as we see Chani and Stilgar now have at least a basic respect for Paul, as essentially they begin learning the proverbial ropes of living in the cruel desert. Chalamet within this aspect brings something I’ll admit I wasn’t sure that he had, which is the certain strong screen presence specific to an action role, particularly after not having been overly impressed by his performance as Henry V in The King. To Chalamet’s credit I entirely forgot about my reservations very quickly here, though part of that might be Chalamet’s build towards achieving this presence much like the way throughout the film we see Paul build his strength in the eyes of the Fremen. Chalamet’s performance is effectively reactionary within the early scenes of learning the teachings of the Fremen where Chalamet actively shows the way that Paul takes in with a keen eye to everything they relate to him. In turn as we see Paul begin to progress in his understanding of the desert and their ways, Chalamet gradually improves this confidence within the action from scene to scene, creating the sense of the man truly learning to be a survivor and warrior in the desert.
Chalamet importantly does not allow himself to get lost within the spectacle rather creates an essential connection within the spectacle by showing this progression of Paul’s skills from one scene to the next. For example when you have the first scene of him and Chani going about taking down an attack copter and a spice mining machine, Chalamet in this first major action scene shows a greater confidence then the opening brief scene of him killing an assassin as nearly a desperate act, now he delivers more precision more confidence, but not too much. There is still much more of an overt fear as he reacts to suddenly losing his cover as he’s about to be shot at and working with Chani with more so an underlying fear that he is holding back. Something that is contrasted against again when we see Paul try to mount a sandworm for time which is one of the most visceral cinematic moments of 2024, and Chalamet’s performance is an important facet to the sequence. Because what we see is basically the building of the legend from the starting place of just a man. As when he’s initially on the worm, Chalamet brings real hesitation, and concern in the steps, showing that it isn’t some easy thing for him in every movement of his work, and only making it look easy once he’s successfully mounted the worm to begin riding it. There Chalamet’s presence truly grows and we too see the power of Paul as we witness him riding the worm and suddenly Chalamet seems like the powerful hero you might believe may be able to destroy the Harkkonnen’s after all. Chalamet portrays this natural growth in confidence within the story making Paul the star of the Fremen, but within the scheme of we watching the film Chalamet making himself the striking presence to lead this epic.
A natural part of the exploration of the situation is within Chalamet’s chemistry with both Bardem and Zendaya. With Bardem and the other Fremen, you get this sense of growing camaraderie that goes right along with his growing skill level in the desert. There’s an ease that Chalamet grows from scene to scene that is rather wonderful, as he progressively becomes less the outsider largely in just the way he interacts among them, speaks to them and is part of the group. Early on there is more so that separation that distance, even that burden of purpose that weighs upon him. As we see him become one with them Chalamet so effectively alleviates the weight creating an ideal levity and even warmth where you see that he is one of them. That of course is amplified all the more by the romance with Chani, which begins as she doubts him a bit and growing belief in Paul as a person. Chalamet and Zendaya’s chemistry here is winning in creating the dynamic specifically built first on a teaching relationship that the sense of affection in these interactions becomes stronger as they proceed from one scene to the next. They really create the connection so gradually that it feels especially potent and convincing. Although we do get the romantic sweeping moment of the first kiss on the sand dunes, it isn’t one that feels at all forced through the articulation of both performers. That articulation not being the big grand gestures for most of it, but just the ease of their connection that you see their love as just as honest of progression as the rest of their work.
All of this would be a very good performance, a completely successful star performance, where Chalamet takes ownership of his scenes, creates Paul as the hero you can easily invest in, and never gets lost within the grandeur of Villeneuve’s direction, but there is the key element within the film that makes Chalamet step up to the next level. The next level as both a performer and creating a greater impact and depth in the role of Paul. Because the truth is the journey of Paul is NOT the hero's journey one has come to expect, and many films portrayed that were heavily influenced by the original novel of Dune. As it isn’t just Paul becoming a hero to the Fremen rather it is becoming their literal messiah due to prophecies being seeded by his mother’s religious order the Bene Gesserit. Something that we originally see as a point of discomfort in Chalamet’s performance. Chalamet takes in the information having a certain sense to use it, but also reservations on the literal exploitation of the faith of these people he has been working with. Making things worse for Paul is that he has visions that taking the role of the Messiah while it will lead to his victory will also lead to a genocidal holy war where billions will die. Chalamet I think is great in the maturity he shows in Paul’s reckoning of this, where we saw angst in the first film of the near teenager, we see the maturity of the adult holding in this fear and trying to choose to avoid it. Unfortunately for Paul, eventually by the mechanizations of a new leader for the Harkonnen forces on Arakkis led by Feyd-Rautha (Austin Butler) he is pushed into a desperation situation where he needs more powerful forces. Chalamet again is great in portraying the quiet frustration and at first the emotional distress in reacting to the deaths of the people he’s come to love. Chalamet shows that while the end will be terrible, Paul’s initial motivation is brought upon more so by connection to these people than just seeking power. However when Paul seeks the power and takes a transformation fully, Chalamet steps up in a way I frankly didn’t know he had with him.
Where before he proved a star charisma as we saw Paul makes it as Fremen, when he becomes their messiah, Chalamet becomes the most charismatic of cult leaders. Every scene where Paul comes in to rally his troops, Chalamet is amazing in just the force of personality he projects into every movement and every line. He isn’t someone with a hint of doubt, of hesitation, of reservation, he is exactly what they want to see as he moves about with this grand intention. What is stunning is there is no delusion of grandeur, you simply see the grandeur in Chalamet’s work as he becomes the figure they intend him to be and Chalamet rightly controls every scene through the charisma he brings. A specific charisma that is fascinating because before Chalamet made Paul likable, in these scenes he honestly makes him a bit terrifying because within them you see the potential for this passion and this power to be used for the most terrible of ends. The final confrontation between Paul, the Emperor (Christopher Walken) and the Harkonnens is turned on its head, because it isn’t good triumphing over evil, rather one form of evil triumphing over another. Chalamet is great in the switch in every step as he comes in without any doubt or mercy for that matter when he kills his foes. Even when he threatens the Emperor and decides that he’ll marry his daughter (Florence Pugh) it is with a cutting order of an emperor himself, rather than any hint of the Paul we started with. The only moment where this breaks is his final fight with Feyd-Rautha, where he is almost killed in the knife fight. And what Chalamet does in this sequence is show that below the bravado and the horde of killers behind him, Paul still is flesh and blood and is terrific in the moment of presenting the very real physical pain as he just barely manages to kill his opponent, taking even two severe wounds from the challenge. However not even that creates modesty to Paul, as he vanquishes his foe we return to a stare now that isn’t of righteous revenge, but terrible ambition. Chalamet gives an incredible performance here, because it is a proper star turn, he carries the epic with a natural ease, but he goes so much further than that. Taking Paul’s journey successfully to the darker path, accentuating all the more because he makes us believe first in Paul the hero, only to make it all the more impactful when he subverts the most basic notion of that by revealing that this was a villain origin story the whole time.
35 comments:
Louis: Who would be your ideal choice to play the titular role in Villeneuve's Cleopatra project.
Still haven't seen this one yet, gotta get on it. Want to rewatch the first one first though.
Louis: Your thoughts on the screenplay.
Given how much you love Hoult's film performances, I'm curious if you've seen him on The Great. It's by far my favorite performance of his.
Placeholder: He has. He loved his work in that as well.
Luke: I think he should find a relative unknown to play the role, I trust him to find someone who would nail it.
Louis and everyone: Tell us which 2025 movies are you looking forward to seeing actors perform in?
Leonardo DiCaprio - The Battle of Baktan Cross (PTA film)
Daniel Day Lewis - Anemone
Wagner Moura - The Secret Agent
Lee Byung Hun - No Other Choice
Dwayne Johnson - The Smashing Machine
Timothée Chalamet - Marty Supreme
From test screening reports, Sean Penn might be the surprise MVP of One Battle After Another so I'm looking forward to that.
Dwayne Johnson in The Smashing Machine is make or break when it comes to my feelings towards to him as a performer because I've been tired of his schtick for a long time now.
And Daniel Day-Lewis returning in a low-key drama is better than nothing.
Louis, could you add Alternate Supporting to the sidebar.
Louis: What are your thoughts on the screenplay of The Order?
1. Stan
2. MacKay
3. Chalamet
4. Plemons
5. Grant
1. Stan
2. MacKay
3. Chalamet
4. Plemons
5. Grant
1. Murphy
2. O’Connor
3. Hoult
4. Kupferer
5. Zovatto
Haven't seen this yet, but I reckon Chalamet winning for ACU would be like Stewart winning for the wrong film in 1940...all the way down to Louis having the exact same rating for all four performances*.
* Assuming Stewart gets upgraded for Shop Around the Corner.
Tahmeed: I think 4.5 is juuust right for Stewart in Shop Around the Corner.
1. Stan
2. MacKay
3. Chalamet
4. Grant
5. Plemons
Louis: Would you say this is Chalamet's best performance?
1. Stan
2. MacKay
3. Chalamet
4. Grant
5. Plemons
1. Stan
2. MacKay
3. Chalamet
4. Grant
5. Plemons
It sucks that we won't get "SILENCE!" as his Oscar clip.
For the request I won for Supporting 2024, I would like to request:
Franz Rogowski in Great Freedom (2021 Lead)
1. Stan
2. Chalamet
3. MacKay
4. Grant
5. Plemons
1. Murphy
2. Hoult
3. O'Connor
4. Kupferer
5. Zovatto
1. Murphy
2. Hoult
3. Kupferer
4. O'Connor
5. Zovatto
1. MacKay
2. Stan
3. Chalamet
4. Plemons
5. Grant
1. Murphy
2. Hoult
3. O'Connor
4. Kupferer
5. Zovatto
1. Stan
2. MacKay
3. Chalamet
4. Grant
5. Plemons
Dune at the Oscars seems to have a similar trajectory to the original Star Wars trilogy.
The first film is the most awarded with 6 Oscars. The second film, superior to its predecessor, was not as well received and only won 2 Oscars. But I really hope Messiah has the same luck as LOTR: The Return of the King.
Louis: Now that you’ve seen I’m Still Here, what do you think of the Best Picture lineup overall? Half of it ended up making your Top Ten list, Nickel Boys is on the outskirts, and three (3) others still landed in your 3-3.5 range.
But then………there’s that film…
Louis: What are a few of your favorite performances that grapple with substance addiction of some sort? If you want to answer this later, no problem.
Luke:
A relative unknown as well. As they need to be young, extremely charismatic yet also period appropriate.
Jonathan:
One where I’d like to see the actual original screenplay as the one I found online is missing Hawat still despite it being known that Henderson shot scenes. But beyond what was on the page, which like the original film I’m sure had more of the political intrigue elements, I’d say more successfully creates a narrative thrust going hand in hand with world building and exposition, something I think the first film's screenplay was a bit less successful at. Where it continues where that film was successful is detailing Paul's journey, however with the greater open intention of setting up Messiah, particularly through the utilization of Chani, from just sort of native love interest to the essential voice of reason and reaction to where Paul’s ambitions are taking him. I still would love to see the full version to see if the political elements were clunkier hence why they were cut, or natural expansion to an even greater impact, however the screenplay is still quite strong even if obvious sacrifices were made, the overall success was remarkable.
Matt:
Bones and All would still be his #1, but this is a close #2.
Marcus:
Adrien Brody - The Brutalist
Ray Milland - The Lost Weekend
Nicolas Cage - Leaving Las Vegas
Lee Remick & Jack Lemmon - Days of Wine and Roses
James Mason - Bigger Than Life
Harvey Keitel - Bad Lieutenant
Natja Brunckhorst - Christiane F.
Robert Downey Jr. - Less Than Zero
David Farrar - The Small Back Room
James Dunn - A Tree Grows in Brooklyn
Roy Scheider - All That Jazz
Aaron Paul - Breaking Bad
Bryan:
Like Maestro last year it has a black hole. But thanks to the swerves of Nickel Boys and especially I’m Still Here, it ended up being a fairly strong lineup overall, not as good as last year on the whole, but better than honestly I thought it would be coming into the season.
Lucas:
The Order’s screenplay is a mixed bag. The FBI procedural elements are a little rote in terms of how our grizzled FBI agent is, where you don’t really get much in terms of his character other than really the basics. The rest of them are purely there for exposition, even Tye Sheridan’s character who should be the heart of the film in a sense or its conscience as the local connection and someone with personal stakes, ends up being just an exposition machine, though part of the problem there is Sheridan, however the screenplay leaving so much room for the actor to fill in is less ideal when the actor is weak. There are some fine elements in terms of breaking the case and the moments of reacting to the final intentions of the titular group, but it could’ve gone further by making the characters on this side more clearly defined. Particularly if you consider the scene where Law breaks back into the house, which makes no logical sense, it also doesn’t make much character sense, as “why?”. There’s no reason for him to want to save Mathews, or even kill himself, the moment just feels there to give the climax more of a climax lacking a proper character motivation. In terms of the depiction of the order the film is more effective in depicting the fringe with a cold honesty and showing the specific coordination behind their vile behavior. Showing the matter of fact in detail, but a disturbing sense of the community behind it, as they treat it all as a normal thing. Although even this I wouldn’t say is perfect, Mathews is really the only developed character beyond a vague note, and the inclusion of Alan Berg seems like something they could’ve expanded on particularly in terms of playing with the idea of a cultural rot at the time.
Louis: Just curious, do you always read the film's screenplays on their own to properly evaluate them, or is that done just for certain films?
Harris:
Situational, but I do tend to like to look at them when possible. As they also offer insight on the direction, acting and editing, since you can see what was on the page and what wasn't.
You ever accidentally find more than one draft of a screenplay? When I was doing my deep dive on Little Shop of Horrors two years ago, I found three drafts (one written in 1983, one in 1984, and the shooting script complete with reshot notes) written by Ashman. I also found like two or three drafts of Beetlejuice.
Louis: What are your thoughts on Kevin Bacon in Maxxxine and Stéphane Ly-Cuong in Emilia Perez?
From penis to vaginaaaaaaa!
Robert: I recall finding some initial draft of the screenplay of Drive a few years ago. To say it wasn't indicative that the film would be any good is an overstatement of its quality.
Robert:
Yes, though I will say side note as someone who seeks out screenplays, I do find it vexing when some post transcripts of the film but listed as screenplays. As recently finding the Annie Hall that was scene to scene the film, before finding the real deal where you see how Allen had to construct the final structure in the editing stage.
Lucas:
Bacon - (The funny thing is he gives basically two 80's style performances in 2024, the first as the action jerk as the best part of Axle F, and here as De Palma style sleaze bag. And while over the top, he's over the top in a way that works in just accentuating every line with some dripping bit of disgusting ease about him. Bacon playing to the extreme just wretched in his slimy accent and just constant lecherous glare. Bacon's on the right track despite Ti West being so far off in terms of the script, and finds basically a lot of what the film should've had a lot more of.)
Ly-Cuong - (Well his delivery of that aforementioned line I think is part of what makes it even worse through his, so called, singing and his expression as though he's high as a kite for some reason or just that jubilant in getting to describe a gender reassignment operation. It's a completely bizarre performance that just makes that already awful scene that much worse...which by the way Saldana is also terrible in that scene with her equally horrid "yes yes yesses".)
Post a Comment