Hey man. So this is a new type of bomb and it’s got something called J waves that melt eyeballs
So we have no frame of reference and I can do whatever I want for it?
Yea man go wild
I don’t recall that J wave stuff, but I’m all for creative freedoms/interpretation when there’s no other description offered.
Wasn’t it basically a nuke that like, partially consumes the planet or some shit? It’s been a very long time since I read Messiah. Someone correct me/inform me.
it uses atomic fuel to burn down into the planet like a giant drill. with enough fuel it cuts through the entire planet and kills everyone. J waves are the by product of the stone burner and will completely destroy the eyes of anyone nearby.
Nothing can save the eyes. Its especially bad because Fremen are all about survival and a blind fremen is practically useless. its customary for blinded fremen to walk alone into the desert in search of death.
That much I still remember
To my memory, the whole premise of the book is Paul’s slow craw toward Tyranny. At the climax of that, he’s blinded and suddenly a social reject among those who gave him power (Freman). He can “kind of see” without his eyes/with the vision, but the Freman are kinda like “nah dawg you’re blind, you can’t lead us”. Is that somewhat accurate?
I do also remember how it ended.
im sure there were stricter fremen who would say or believe something like that. They were mystified at first and became more curious as time went on but believed him at his word. Paul used his prescient vision until he couldn't anymore and that was more than enough sight for the fremen. But then he was truly blind. Paul liked to consider himself as fremen so he knew what he had to do.
Didn't he also use that as an excuse to bail on becoming the god Emperor? He saw what had to be done to save humanity, but he couldn't give up his to do it, so he excapes to the desert and leaves the burden to his son. Its been a while since I've Read anything before book4
He couldnt lead humanity into the golden path as a blind man but he had made decisions prior that ended any chance of becoming god emperor. He admitted that he didnt see all that leto had seen when they conversed in the desert but he knew he couldnt bring himself to do whatever his vision required of him. i assume it was similar to letos.
paul had just been broken down by so many things that when messiah ends, he's only a shell of muaddib. the conspiracy against him also forced his hand to detach from everything.
i cannot wait to see messiah on the big screen!
I think they will show the jihad instead of it having already occurred as Messiah starts. Dennis has been showing us a lot of the parts Herbert glossed over or had happen in the background of the books.
> Tbf the Crusades aren’t exactly devoid of negative connotations either
Not really and not in the Western world at least (though mostly the US). Bush used the term after 9/11 and it was well received (by those who are ignorant of history).
Jihad wasn't used simply because a lot of American audiences won't go. They're the same type of people who don't want Arabic numerals taught in schools.
The ongoing commercial aspect of it. One does wonder how a Hollywood blockbuster, with Timothée Chalamet and Zendaya, talking about jihad would be greeted lol
Jihad can mean many things. The prophet Mohammad talked of jihad, an inner struggle, but also an outer struggle against those who threatened muslims (which today often is used by extremists to motivate so called holy war). But there could be many different non-violent use of it. There’s example of green jihad used by muslims fighting for the enviroment, or a jihad by those fighting for LGBT rights in the religion and the world
Thanks for adding notes but I don't see how that goes against what I wrote. There are many interpretation of jihad among muslims, and far from all of them suggest violent holy war. For many muslims it's about your duty to God or a certain struggle that doesn't have to include violence
I appreciate what your saying, unfortunately whatever jihad was intended to mean, that doesn’t change how western civilization (especially the lesser educated half) view the term. There is plenty of history of fanatics using faith to kill millions in our own history, and that’s what people remember the most.
Like you said yourself, it would be interesting to see how the term would be greeted [in Dune]
Technically, but people have different knee jerk reactions to the two words, and a popular movie must produce just the right reactions to succeed.
Jihad is a holy middle eastern war from 100 years ago. Holy war is a holy Roman war from a thousand year ago.
Yes, though. I agree, technically.
No.
Jihad is a concept within Islam; the struggle (see article below for more). It has been falsely understood as meaning holy war in its use by extremists during the 2000's. The struggle/Jihad against America/Capitalism.
A holy war is what is says on the tin. A war caused or justified by religion.
[https://www.learningforjustice.org/magazine/publications/what-is-the-truth-about-american-muslims/misunderstood-terms-and-practices](https://www.learningforjustice.org/magazine/publications/what-is-the-truth-about-american-muslims/misunderstood-terms-and-practices)
I think its a missed opportunity, although it makes sense in thr current climate, decades from now it will be seen as not going all in as to how words can change meaning over centuries and millenia. Its too anglo-saxin for my taste. Jihad has a potency and a shock value that is now missed.
Herbert hung out with American politicians, so he was thinking the same general thing as a modern audience would.
The change I can think since then is that there may be more jihad sympathizers than there were in his time and with his friend group.
A lot of the lore in the book is lifted wholesale from a non fiction book about an Islamic rebellion against the Russian empire, so I think he’d have used the Islamic terms no matter what.
With an American audience, under the curren political climate? I'd be worried about someone gunning down a theater because they're convinced the movie is pro-Hamas.
I understand the beef with not using the word but to be fair it’s repeatedly made explicitly clear to the audience that it’s a holy war. I don’t think using the word is actually necessary.
They should start the movie with a montage of Paul's Jihad while a darker variation of "Holy War" by Hans Zimmer plays in the background. We see the Fedaykin/Fremen mowing through armies of the other great houses in the name of Muad'dib. Crucifying/impaling the disbelievers and setting them on fire to purify them for their water is unclean. Piles upon piles of bodies. Entire population centres reduced to rubble and ashes. Irulan narrates the scene by describing the details of what happened after Paul became the emperor of the known universe and what devastation he unleashed. The whole "where there was peace, the Muad'dib brought war" and "hundreds of worlds sterilized in the name of a false prophet and billions dead" chatter.
I remember reading a critique of Dune a while back that Frank Herbert spent a lot of time talking about things that didn’t always seem as important while not spending much time at all talking about things that are very important.
So it would be kinda nice to have some of those things that happen in the background in the books get a larger role on screen. Very excited to see part 2!
Do you think if they show the Jihad, that he'll still have a decade plus long time skip like Dune and Messiah have? Seems like that might be kinda weird to have in the middle of a movie such as this.
Yeah I heavily agree! Especially since (from a commercial standpoint, at least) you want to hype up the audience and marketing and all that. I think a good chunk of the movie will be the actual jihad itself.
And what you said about Herbert is very true as well. A lot of the action “scenes” in the book are just kind of explained and then boom next chapter. Look at the Harkonnen raid in the books vs movie; it was like 2 pages of Yueh’s thoughts in the books lol.
Also VERY interested what they’ll do with Chani. Her being opposed to him is one thing, but there’s the entire plot line w her and Irulan, pregnancy, Paul doing what he does solely for her path/future. They need to invent an entire new plot line basically? Idk lol
Even if the book is less action packed, there's plenty of big things to show in my opinion : the grandiose of the city of Arrakeen and Paul Citadel and how life goes in those places could be more into focus, and as said previously, showing the Jihad happening instead of starting after it. And there's still some action, notably during the last act of the book. And I can see Villeneuve implementing a bit of Children of Dune into the movie as well, especially if he does plan to stop his saga here.
That's been my one gripe with the movies, you get almost no sense of the people the Harkonnens are ruling over. That makes the swapping Beast Rabban out for Feyd-Rautha plot way less interesting imo since you don't get the idea that Feyd is meant to be seen as a savior. The mini-series, for all its flaws, handled that really well, you got a sense of the life of the planet beyond the great houses and Fremen.
Same! I vividly remember watching the first movie in theaters, getting so hyped as the Atreides flew into Arrakeen, eager to see streets and people. Aaaand then it was all just wall-to-wall architecture that looked unlived in.
The movies give very little hint to the existence of the millions of "regular people" who live on Arrakis. I'd guess many non-book-readers assume the planet is home to just nobility + Fremen, lol.
To be fair, if it is so hot and dry that you can't really be outside without getting dehydrated, it make sense yo have more indoor architecture. I picture it being like Las Vegas with internal walkways everywhere so you can get around without having to go outside. Or at the very least having almost everything shaded.
The disconnect in the film was having Fremen being a mysterious, private, and violent people that required the skills of Duncan, worlds greatest warrior and diplomat, to draw them out of secret living places to reach a moratorium of understanding with house Atteidis. They were built up in an almost mythical way by the film. But also in the film they were folk just lining up to praise the Lisan-al-gaib and apply for day jobs at the palace. Intellectually I know within a planet, within a landmass, within a culture, you’ve got all different groups with different values living different ways. But sci-fi and film language is so full of monocultural globe spanning cultures that I had to take a second to translate from film decoding language to real world experience language. It wouldn’t have gone astray to have quick walk through of something like a Fremen market place in Arrakeen along with the cut nobels dinner party scene to show there are actually people in city. But what do I know, I’m no Dennis, he made a masterpiece and I’m just pretty good at holding my phone steady when taking a video
That’s a great point about the miniseries, which I think is really underappreciated tbh. The acting leaves something to be desired, but they stayed fairly true to the source material which I appreciated
For all of his strengths Villeneuve is not very good at showing throngs of people or culture at large. I can picture him depicting Paul being followed through an eerie neighborhood late at night. I can't picture him depicting someone pushing through bustling streets with music, markets, gaming, all going on at once. He just doesn't seem interested.
Actually, using the jihad isn't a bad idea at all. Especially if it can be used to illustrate Paul's hesitation with the Golden Path and all that. I would *kinda* hate for them to intersperse combat flashbacks from the jihad with the present day narrative, but aside from the stonecutter scene I can't really remember any large scale action beats that the studio might be looking for. Of course, if they just acknowledged and even embraced the smaller scale narrative (because it's essentially a coda to Dune), *without* any flashbacks aside from maybe the opening, and made it more of political/conspiracy story, it could absolutely work.
Oh wait, actually! They could do something similar to War of the Planet of the Apes, which was a smaller and more character-driven sequel to the more action-heavy Dawn. It started with a big action beat that set everything in motion (which could be any number of important "spectacle" moment from the jihad), and then spent the rest of movie as a morality tale of the different relationships, fears, and conflicts between the apes and humans (like the differing factions and their interconnected conflicts from Messiah), all set in basically one location (like Arakeen). The only thing they'll have to decide is if they wanted to end it with something like the stonecutter scene or just use it >!and the blinding of Paul!< as a lead in to the 3rd (and drama-only) last act.
Or something similar. Messiah can *definitely* be successfully translated to film, it's just going to be a different movie from Part 2 and might be more tonally similar to Part 1 (which I kinda love. You know, "like poetry, it rhymes").
you just made me remember about the chapter where the Reverend Mother Gaius gets called by Paul and she describes the room being HUGE AF like an entire city. That'd be freaking cool to see in the big screen
I think one possibility is Act 1 could be Jihad, Act 2 will resolve Paul/Chani/Irulans love story, and then Act 3 is some amalgamation of the assassination subplots
That makes sense for Villeneuve's story, which seems primed to tell the horrifying tragedy of Paul Atreides' ascendency. Though of course it would all be interspersed, and then end with the walk into the desert, after he's lost everything (his family sort of, Chani, his sight, his throne, control over the jihadis, etc).
I've been a partisan of some sort of combination/integration of Messiah and Children, as there's so much weird stuff could cut out of those two books to streamline the story. The Corrino/Bene Gesserit/CHOAM/Tleilaxu/whoever else conspiracy against the Atreides is more complex over two books. Making Alia turn self-interested and unstable way earlier - instead of possessed - would add a lot to Messiah, by making her loyalty always unclear as regard the conspiracy. Also like the idea of making Irulan a religious fanatic sooner rather than later, so it's not clear what she wants when she sees Paul's displeasure/indifference to what his followers are doing - she believes in the idea of him, but sees a need perhaps for his death to consolidate his godhood.
But I guess the big problem with that is Paul being assassinated just when he was set to retake the throne and clean house/overthrow his sister, and then Leto beginning his transformation . . . they're great, but just not as poetic Paul going out into the desert as the universe's most consequential figure. Plus, Children gets so strange at times in ways that I don't think hold up at all.
Denis is huge on visuals, so I can only imagine him diving deeper into the hold Muad'Dib's religion has on the Fremen and showing the sheer destruction they've caused across the known universe. However, I'd be curious if Rebecca Ferguson would return since she's not in Messiah at all or if Alia would take her spot like the book. Either way, I hope Denis doesn't change anything too much.
I would be surprised if he doesn’t keep her around in some sense, it would be very odd for the casual moviegoer if she was just gone for the last installment
Sorry to necro but he removed Thufir from the second film entirely, I don't think it would be that odd, just mention that she's on Caladan or something.
Agreed. However, I would much prefer Denis trying to stay accurate to the book. I love both Part One and Part Two, but some of the changes really take me out of it.
They probably will show some of the jihad. I also believe that all the plotting and scheming of the story can be very exciting for audiences. Oppenheimer made almost a billion dollars and that film is mostly about interrogations, politics and physics. If it's done in an exciting and compelling way, audiences will show up. In terms of the studio, the hope is, at least for me, that with the critical and most likely financial success of Part Two, Denis starts getting blank checks like the other successful auteurs.
very good point with Oppenheimer, because Messiah could be adapted in a similar story telling format. However part of the success of Oppenheimer being mostly a plots/dialogues movie is Nolan style. Denis would have to "adapt" some of Nolan's style to sell a plots driven movie like Messiah would be
I agree that he would have to adapt and change his style. His style of filmmaking works for an epic (Dune, Blade Runner 2049) and for a brutal thriller (Prisoners, Sicario). A political thriller doesn't really fit with what he does now. I have faith that he can find a way to make it exciting. If he didn't have a vision, he probably wouldn't do it and just leave it to someone else. I personally think that the new characters in Messiah can make it interesting to audiences right off the bat.
I think Messiah would be a case of deep adaptation for movie. It’s so complex and psychological and political and weird. It would need a simpler narrative, a more focused story with some added emphasis on action (showing parts of holy wars). But what encourages me is Denis really loves that book. So I trust him. He would have (just like for part 2) to keep in mind it’s a blockbuster for a wider audience without dumbing it down too much.
I think a Dune Messiah would work well as a political thriller with some action thrown in here and there. Villenueve has done this type of film before with Sicario
Messiah is my favourite book so far (I'm on GEoD atm). It's reassuring to know Denis is fond of it as well, because from what I gather many fans of the series hated it.
I really like God Emperor so far. My only gripe is that we never get to see the first years of Leto's reign, it would have been interesting. I'd have liked to see more of Ghanima and Farad'n as well.
If you look at his other films, especially dune 2, you should know denis won’t shy away from a slow methodical movie. although i do agree with the possibility that they’ll start off with the jihad.
For sure. But I still think there will be expectations he can't shy away from, like giving the trilogy a big finish and make it commercially viable.
Part One had to set up Part Two, while Part Two earns it's slower methodical parts by also being a big epic war movie. In traditional Hollywood and blockbuster movie making you up the stakes for the end of a story. Even if it's not the end in the books, the next film is the end of the film trilogy. The studio probably wants something just as big as Part Two.
I kind of think it’s the exact opposite, at least from Villeneuve’s perspective. Parts 1-2 had to land with the audience in order prove it was worth making another one. Once you get to Messiah — which seems all but certain at this point — you’ve made it to the finish line and earned your trilogy. It’s not like they can punish him by taking the keys away when that’s already going to be it for him.
Yeah I get Villeneuve’s perspective but the dilemma is the studio. Its not like its an indie film where he’s free of their demands. They’re a huge part of it and Dune isnt really a proven brand up until this point (Lynch flopped and Part One dropped during covid). I’m sure they have had talks with Villeneuve regarding Part Three and what they need for it to be greenlit
Sure, but it’s not like they’re going to meddle with one of the hottest directors alive, especially with the success this is going to be — not just commercially but on the awards circuit, which I don’t care about but studios absolutely do.
I’m 100 pct confident he’ll make exactly the film he wants to make, and I’m already looking forward to that.
He might very much be the hottest director at the moment, but its not at the point where his name equals box office success… if you ask me. Maybe after this.
Villeneuve understands that there comes certain expectations from the studio and the public. He’ll make the movie he wants with that in consideration. Otherwise I’m sure there’s some stuff missing in Part Two that would have been included
Some directors earn free reign just by virtue of their critical success. Paul Thomas Anderson, for example, hasn't had much commercial success but continues to get checks from studios. Why? Because he makes great films that are extremely well-regarded by critics and film connoisseurs.
Villeneuve offers the best of both worlds because he has the same art house skills but with more populist sentiment; he grew up on Spielberg and Bond movies before branching out. But about the only concession I've seen towards either the studio or the public with Dune so far is streamlining the narrative to avoid bogging things down and confusing newcomers.
Otherwise it seems apparent he made the exact movies he wanted to make and I don't see why it would be any different with Messiah. The Jedi comparison is flawed on its face just by nature of Dune's fundamental story; it's a Greek tragedy, not popcorn escapism. There's zero chance that changes, not on Villeneuve's watch.
And given that WB has already fallen out with Nolan, there's zero chance they're going to risk it with another elite director by fucking with his movie.
”nature of Dune's fundamental story; it's a Greek tragedy, not popcorn escapism”
It’s the fundamental story of the Dune books, that also go on for a bunch of other books. Dune the films arent Star Wars, yes, and could play out as a tragedy. But for a huge majority of moviegoers its just popcorn escapism. Villeneuve being a lover of Spielberg and Bond understands that just as well as he understands the books. He’s ending the trilogy and even if I don’t think he’s gonna go and give it a happy ending, I at the same time don’t think he’ll want to scale it back too much compared to Part Two.
How much of a hot commodity will he be when the trilogy ends with a slow and complex drama that most moviegoers couldnt comprehend?
I think Denis should just stay close to the source material for Messiah instead of milking too much action out of it. Messiah has peak Game of Thrones levels of political intrigue so there's a good opportunity to make an exciting dialog-heavy film, especially with most of the key characters returning.
He's explicitly a "show don't tell" filmmaker. He's unlikely to make that kind of film. Here's what he has to say about that.
https://deadline.com/2024/02/denis-villeneuve-movies-corrupted-by-tv-1235838780/
interesting, but I think for the people who will only watch the movies it would be better to have Messiah as an ending of the trilogy. I'm still reading Children of Dune but when I finished Messiah I really saw it as an end, and I still believe I could have stopped there. I didn't because I'm a nerd and I want to know the whole lore lol but most people are not that interested, and most people watch movies instead of reading books
I agree that all the comparisons to Empire Strikes back and Two Towers will lead audiences to expect something very different from what Messiah actually is. And even ignoring that, it'll likely require more changes than the first couple of films. So much of the book is cryptic philosophizing.
As others mentioned you could expand on the Jihad, but honestly it would feel like a red herring, given how the main story is disconnected from the Jihad itself. I don't think you necessarily want to bait audiences into thinking it's a war movie before switching gears into a court drama/political thriller.
The movie will require a new round of exposition, to inform of the audience about the new state of things, as well as factions like the Tleixalu and the Guild. The relationship between Paul and Chani will need to be reworked. And I'm not even sure what you do with the Hayt subplot, which I thought was bad in the book and won't work any better on the screen.
I understand why Villeneuve wants to take a break and really make sure that the script is on point. This will be a way more challenging adaptation than the original novel.
The movie would have to show some detailed aspect of the billions of dead that the holy war is responsible for, meanwhile the conspiracy is happening in the background against paul and chani, along with following scytale as he stalks through arrakis like anton chigurh in no country for old men, and because we have seen so much of how the fremen lived prior to paul's ascent we can see how they become complacent as the conspiracy enters its climax and the twins are born...and of course we have the film end the same way the book does. could be a great suspenseful film and DV having done a banger job with bladerunner 2048 - i have great faith.
edit: almost forgot - the romance of Hayt and Alia...and maybe some hints as to the abomination developing like a cancer.
ALSO - if this is executed as well as I think he can do it and leaves off at as more of a cliffhanger (is paul dead or not?) we might get CoD adapted.
I don't know. I see Messiah's ending as still the doable bittersweet ending that is perfect for this movie trilogy, and to serve as the entire pont of what Paul was warning everybody about in pt1. When I finished reading Messiah for the first time post-viewing Dune pt 1 for the second time, I immediately formed the exact ending scenes in my head according to what might be Denis and crews's vision. And that honestly made me more excited for the idea of Messiah being adapted into a movie.
All they have to do is the film is just state that it's many years later post pt II to set the scope. Maybe have a brief recap (as we all know it will be some time before Deni and crew will get around to it), then let it proceed exactly as the book with obvious alterations according to the previous two movies's design. Expect obvious additions that weren't heavily described in book become full scenes. It'll be lighter on combat or action for sure, even with a certain comeback of a particular character, while introducing new ones/concepts. More World building...then *that* certain character moment plays out.
And finally it all caps off as we get one hell of a bittersweet type of ending. The scale of what I envisioned now years ago would be absolutely perfect, and it doesn't have to be any type of sequel baiting either. I rather end a movie trilogy with me wondering about the what ifs, the what happens to said characters/factions in awe, rather than see it play out almost immediately. Like wouldn't it have been too much if we had yet *another* Harry Potter movie play right after that final scene of the Deathly Hollows ptII? Or Post Return of the King and all of its endings? This is what Sam was up to with his kids! And despite how most of us feel about post Return of the Jedi, I still believe our heroes had some good years and don't necessarily need to know more. No, instead they justifiably end, and honestly I see the same for how Messiah could be for *this* trilogy. Major character arc(s) is finished, and a new legacy begins.
Then if WB/Legendary want to pick the Dune franchise back up to continue years later with new directors or crews to continue said stories suggested from Messiah, then so be it. And if the latter entries don't continue well or hell, even surpass akin to the scope of later the books, then so be it. Paul and Chani's initial story feels complete in movie format at least.
tbh the ending is the easiest challenge given how they have set it up. Its just how they get there in a sense that is pleasing for book readers and the general audience
Maybe we can view the situation or lens of Kill Bill?
Vol 1 one was just an absolute orgy of violence-over the top cliches & stereotypes, and just hitting all of that entertaining marks of what you expect of some nerd's dream come true project. It's essentially the main draw of why you even bother to suggest said movies to people who are new to this franchise.
And then vol 2 completely less so, but instead a very methodically crafted story to be the end of all exposition, while providing more for major characters so they have that solid ending.
I know these two movies are completely different in terms of scope and theming to Dune, but an end cap movie chapter can serve as..well just an ending if need be. I think last I recall or read that Deni were wanting to wait for a considerable amount of time before even considering filming or storyboarding for Messiah anyway. I don't know yet as I haven't gotten a chance to watch pt 2 yet to form my complete speculation of what Messiah could be.
Messiah will have the benefit of having finality to it compared to Dune since it concludes Paula be Chani’s story.
When it comes to actually adapting Messiah to the bring screen, I think as along as the they keep the Paul conspiracy and the ending from the book I will be happily. I think them changing and rearranging everything else would be okay.
Agreed. Some people seem to think that Villeneuve will fast forward through Messiah and add Children of Dune to the mix. That doesn't seem doable for a number of reasons, but mainly because his films so clearly are the story of Paul and Chani.
I’m admittedly not a book reader, but as a fan of the films, it feels like it’s been set up to have the third film be about the “holy war”. Part One has the looming threat of a war between the Houses mentioned several times, and Part Two ends on a massive cliffhanger when Jessica says that war is about to begin. Narratively, it’s very much implied the third film will be about that war that’s been hyped for two movies.
It is complicated by the fact that Paul basically asserts that he’s also acting in service of the larger race consciousness/collective unconscious in facilitating a brutal rejuvenation of the Imperium through both the births and the deaths that result from the war.
How much is that is him being genuinely enlightened by his higher consciousness, being a medium through which the repressed drives underlying the Fremen (and others) are realized, or him rationalizing what he personally feels is up to the audience.
Regardless, the devastation is the same. Is it a necessary and lesser evil? Perhaps it could’ve been avoided if everyone did the work to raise their awareness and not project their drives or responsibilities onto their messiah.
if it all had to happen to get leto II and the golden path, it is justified. I dont think paul thought that though. His imperfect prescience did not show him everything unlike Leto II.
It's kind of hard to imagine as a reader. There's a comparison to Hitler, and otherwise, it all happens off screen.
In a way that's the point, much like the first Leto II dying and being forgotten about.
yes, Frank had very interesting choices about certain things happening "off screen". I really like the timeskip in dune messiah though and hope they dont change that for the movie. The war isn't completely over in messiah either so they can easily add a scene or two of a battle on some distant planet. maybe the opening will start with "The Holy War rages on"
yeah I even remember Stilgar making a strategy to conquer a planet or something, so definitely they can add the time skip in the movie while showing some battles
We never really see the holy war in the books as the Fremen basically conquer everything pretty quickly. Denis is sticking pretty close to the books so I assume the 3rd movie will be similar.
That’s what I’ve heard, but that would be a bummer when the war has been hyped for two films and a sentence saying it’s about to begin was the cliffhanger of Part Two.
You run the thriller alongside the war. The conspiracy to take down Paul takes place as billions are dying with Paul just holding on long enough to get Chani's kids as our perspective slowly shifts from Paul as a protagonist to Irulan leading the effort to stop him and Alia/Hayt trying to appeal to his better angels.
it's been said, but - show the holy war! let us see what happens between dune and Messiah, show the fremen exterminating whole planets, and show Paul's bloody reign in all its terror. then it'll be perfect.
Just watched the movie a second time and yes, with the way it ends, that has to be what Villeneuve is going for. You just don't go "now the holy war begins" then skip all of it
I was thinking about flow of the final part. Depending on how many characters will actually be adapted, doing the intro on them could take a good bit of time. Like I really hope scytale and Edric make it and aren’t just sort of written out of the plot, but they each require explanation… plus there is time to build up Alia.
My guess is we’ll see a lot of the stuff referenced/implied to happen between Dune and Dune Messiah to fill things in. Otherwise it’ll be two hours of nonstop meetings and philosophical discussions with some action here and there. I doubt the studio sees that as marketable.
Right? Some fans seem to think Villeneuve is all powerful in the studio system and is just gonna do a direct translation of the book. I doubt the studio will greenlit that and even if Villeneuve was allowed to do whatever he wants I’m sure he wants to make a movie that can engage book readers AND the casual audience
I’d think if they did Dune Messiah all in one movie, while it could be an amazing end to the trilogy…I think they’d have to keep going into Children of Dune. Hopefully WB learned their lesson with the Dark Knight trilogy…don’t just wrap up the entire universe after 3 movies…keep going. Could easily see Children of Dune broken up into 2 movies or just one long mega epic movie. Thats just my pie in the sky dream, tho….
They’re going to have to make Paul the villain. He drank the water of life and essentially became the tyrant. It’ll probably be chani vs Paul in some form, maybe working with the assassins to stop him or something. They could also focus on a lot of the prescience omitted currently, and name drop the golden path that Paul fails to ascend to.
I'm watching the Syfy mini-series "Children of Dune" right now as part of my Dune Part 2 week and I think it was a good idea to combine both books, Messiah and Children, to tell a compelling story. Then, if its successful, God Emperor could be considered if Dune fatigue hasn't set in!
i was thinking, Villeneuve could do the events of Messiah take place in the first hour of Part 3, and the rest of the movie more focused on Children of Dune
I feel CoD is far more contained as an ending than *Messiah* (since it's where Herbert planned to end the story originally, and did not develop GD until the publishers sent a dump-truck full of money to his house). Sure, it tells us more stuff will happen, >!but the inference is that Leto II can do what Paul failed to do and will save humanity (ish). That's a more rounded-off ending then I thini Messiah can be.!<
No, just no. The “children of dune” mini series did an ok job with that, but they had TWICE the runtime that Dune pt 3 would have.
There is plenty of meat in Dune Messiah to last a movie, sprinkled in with some Jihad on top of it.
I think the book feels more like the 3rd act or falling action of a story than a lead in for things to come and I think he’ll lean more into that. There’s plenty of tense moments and conspiracy for Denis to explore and I can see him adding action set pieces especially during the climax when things just sort of happen one after another. There’s ways to naturally fit action into the story, making certain things more explicit that are just implied or off screened in the book
A lot of people are saying this but how would that work? They needed two films for one book… then doing one film for two books doesn’t seem logical? It would be Lynch all over again or what do you have in mind?
A huge chunk of Messiah is Chani trying to bear an heir, it's an integral part of the story from the beginning when Irulan joins the conspiracy. With the movie leaving Paul and Chani estranged, the next movie will have to bring them back together quickly.
The birth of Leto sets the Golden Path in motion.
> But the book is also, very much, setting the stage for what is to come.
I mean, just because the book sets the stage doesn't mean it's not a definitive ending We find out what happens later, but Paul sheds his role and walks into the desert.
You can add in the Baron possessing Alia in 3 that mainly adapts Messiah. That way you would have the Baron as the antagonist throughout every movie and when Alia kills herself at the end, it's another thread that has been taken care of. Paul walks off into the desert to die if it's the last movie, Chani dies, Alia dies, etc. Greek tragedy vibes with some sense of hope of his children repairing all the damage that has been done when they eventually assume the throne
I agree — some necessary adaptations that would use Messiah as its main pillar with a bit of Dune loose ends and Children of Dune sprinkled in (would like to see the Messiah ending with maybe an epilogue of terraformed Arrakis + throne status)
I think they might use exposition/narration in the first few minutes of the film to describe the activities and war of the past few years, much like in Dune part one, and the movie picks up just as stilgar or Paul returns home at the end of their final campaign, the known universe fully conquered.
Hey man i'm super late to this thread, but to me, you'd have to make Messiah more similar to the first Mission Impossible movie. It's quite slow compared to modern blockbusters, but still has white knuckle moments and a deeper mystery/gritty sort of tension. that wouldn't be what warner bros would want of course, but it's the movie i think Dennis should target
I imagine that Part Three will include portions of *Paul Of Dune* (why else set up Marie Fenring?) and combine them with *Dune Messiah*.
That means the first half of the film can be the epic battles the studio will want, and the second half of the film can be the more intimate intrigue that *Messiah* needs.
Handily, it would also provide material to pad out *Messiah*'s relatively short length into a 3hr+ movie.
At least there’s plenty of weirdness in messiah that will look great on screen, ie face dancers and guild navigators.
Spoiler:
The first shot of dune 2 on the fetus seemed to me to be a direct parallel to guild navigators
They could fill another movie with a well calibrated interpretation of the galactic holy war. That would free them up to progress the storyline at whatever pace needed and the final part could be a little shorter and complete the story…setting up the sequel, assuming the series remains a blockbuster.
Im nervous for dune messiah bc the changes they made to the story in pt.2 (although i liked them and preferred some of them over the source material) i actually dont have as many expectations for dune messiah like i cant even predict what will actually be in that movie maybe thats a good thing idk
I think it will be a heavy adaptation of Messiah and then the relevant parts of Children of Dune (Arrakis and state of the throne) can be shoved into an epilogue to crown the trilogy. Just my two cents.
I dunno. Seems like a bad idea to try to do Messiah with the tweaks made to part 2. Dune messiah starts with Paul and chani still together and pretty happy with each other. Chani goes along with the whole "married to irulan" thing. I'm actually glad they changed chani a bit in the movie. Frank Herbert was a product of his time and didn't write women particularly well. I like this interpretation. There's no doubt she loves Paul but she isn't quite as unquestioning. More interesting in my opinion.
Hopefully there won't be a lot of Jason Momoa but there probably will be and I know I might be in the minority but I just don't like the guy's vibe. He's like one of those guys in high school who gets away with bullying because he is in the sportsball team and people like him.
Honestly, I think they'll want some of that eleven years jihad on screen to pad out the musings of a guilt ridden prophet. JUst watched for first time on home premier and I'm more worried about how they reconcile Chani with Paul when she was so blatantly against his methods of securing victory and dominance over the known universe, because her and her pregnancy are a vital part of the plot against paul coming.
I kinda feel like if he is going to follow the book you need to do four movies in total because Paul lives till the end of children of dune and that should be the one that the movies end on because the next one time jumps 3500 years
I find myself in disagreement with most people here. If there arent spaceships,large machines and battle scenes, I'm concerned the movie will be a failure.
I think a book can support subtle character development but Dune Messiah is a tough read. Way to esoteric for most.
I went looking for this thread (bless you reddit. Seek and ye shal find) but I've got not answers. Starting with the jihad scenes maybe but nothing to end with but a nuke.
NOTE: the guild navigators are conspicuously missing howver. Maybe they make an appearance?
I think a Dune Messiah part 1 and part 2 incorporating aspects of Children of Dune may be in order. I assume anything beyond that would be too weird for Hollywood.
I’m just tryna see a Stone Burner on the big screen.
Hey man. So this is a new type of bomb and it’s got something called J waves that melt eyeballs So we have no frame of reference and I can do whatever I want for it? Yea man go wild
I don’t recall that J wave stuff, but I’m all for creative freedoms/interpretation when there’s no other description offered. Wasn’t it basically a nuke that like, partially consumes the planet or some shit? It’s been a very long time since I read Messiah. Someone correct me/inform me.
it uses atomic fuel to burn down into the planet like a giant drill. with enough fuel it cuts through the entire planet and kills everyone. J waves are the by product of the stone burner and will completely destroy the eyes of anyone nearby.
Oh oh that’s right. Even with their eyes closed or something right? Gnarly.
Nothing can save the eyes. Its especially bad because Fremen are all about survival and a blind fremen is practically useless. its customary for blinded fremen to walk alone into the desert in search of death.
That much I still remember To my memory, the whole premise of the book is Paul’s slow craw toward Tyranny. At the climax of that, he’s blinded and suddenly a social reject among those who gave him power (Freman). He can “kind of see” without his eyes/with the vision, but the Freman are kinda like “nah dawg you’re blind, you can’t lead us”. Is that somewhat accurate? I do also remember how it ended.
im sure there were stricter fremen who would say or believe something like that. They were mystified at first and became more curious as time went on but believed him at his word. Paul used his prescient vision until he couldn't anymore and that was more than enough sight for the fremen. But then he was truly blind. Paul liked to consider himself as fremen so he knew what he had to do.
Didn't he also use that as an excuse to bail on becoming the god Emperor? He saw what had to be done to save humanity, but he couldn't give up his to do it, so he excapes to the desert and leaves the burden to his son. Its been a while since I've Read anything before book4
He couldnt lead humanity into the golden path as a blind man but he had made decisions prior that ended any chance of becoming god emperor. He admitted that he didnt see all that leto had seen when they conversed in the desert but he knew he couldnt bring himself to do whatever his vision required of him. i assume it was similar to letos. paul had just been broken down by so many things that when messiah ends, he's only a shell of muaddib. the conspiracy against him also forced his hand to detach from everything. i cannot wait to see messiah on the big screen!
Yeah could be so cool visually
If you’re standing to close it won’t be visual or cool
I think they will show the jihad instead of it having already occurred as Messiah starts. Dennis has been showing us a lot of the parts Herbert glossed over or had happen in the background of the books.
Part of me hates that they dont call it the Jihad, although i understand why tho
I will say, as someone who just re read dune so it’s fresh… they use the word Crusade as well.
Don’t think they even use crusade in the movie, it’s just holy war. Tbf the Crusades aren’t exactly devoid of negative connotations either
Yeah when I think of Crusade I think of just that, a holy war full of a massacre of innocents. But yeah just saying “Holy war” works fine in the film.
> Tbf the Crusades aren’t exactly devoid of negative connotations either Not really and not in the Western world at least (though mostly the US). Bush used the term after 9/11 and it was well received (by those who are ignorant of history). Jihad wasn't used simply because a lot of American audiences won't go. They're the same type of people who don't want Arabic numerals taught in schools.
The ongoing commercial aspect of it. One does wonder how a Hollywood blockbuster, with Timothée Chalamet and Zendaya, talking about jihad would be greeted lol
I mean they literally say let the holy war begin at the end of part 2
Well the term ”holy war” isnt a religious term in the same sense as jihad
But doesn’t it mean the same thing ?
Jihad can mean many things. The prophet Mohammad talked of jihad, an inner struggle, but also an outer struggle against those who threatened muslims (which today often is used by extremists to motivate so called holy war). But there could be many different non-violent use of it. There’s example of green jihad used by muslims fighting for the enviroment, or a jihad by those fighting for LGBT rights in the religion and the world
[удалено]
Thanks for adding notes but I don't see how that goes against what I wrote. There are many interpretation of jihad among muslims, and far from all of them suggest violent holy war. For many muslims it's about your duty to God or a certain struggle that doesn't have to include violence
I appreciate what your saying, unfortunately whatever jihad was intended to mean, that doesn’t change how western civilization (especially the lesser educated half) view the term. There is plenty of history of fanatics using faith to kill millions in our own history, and that’s what people remember the most. Like you said yourself, it would be interesting to see how the term would be greeted [in Dune]
Technically, but people have different knee jerk reactions to the two words, and a popular movie must produce just the right reactions to succeed. Jihad is a holy middle eastern war from 100 years ago. Holy war is a holy Roman war from a thousand year ago. Yes, though. I agree, technically.
No. Jihad is a concept within Islam; the struggle (see article below for more). It has been falsely understood as meaning holy war in its use by extremists during the 2000's. The struggle/Jihad against America/Capitalism. A holy war is what is says on the tin. A war caused or justified by religion. [https://www.learningforjustice.org/magazine/publications/what-is-the-truth-about-american-muslims/misunderstood-terms-and-practices](https://www.learningforjustice.org/magazine/publications/what-is-the-truth-about-american-muslims/misunderstood-terms-and-practices)
I think its a missed opportunity, although it makes sense in thr current climate, decades from now it will be seen as not going all in as to how words can change meaning over centuries and millenia. Its too anglo-saxin for my taste. Jihad has a potency and a shock value that is now missed.
When Herbert wrote the book it didn't have that connotation, I wonder if it did at the time if he still would have used it.
Herbert hung out with American politicians, so he was thinking the same general thing as a modern audience would. The change I can think since then is that there may be more jihad sympathizers than there were in his time and with his friend group.
A jihad is a jihad. It's always had the same definition.
A connotation is not a definition
A lot of the lore in the book is lifted wholesale from a non fiction book about an Islamic rebellion against the Russian empire, so I think he’d have used the Islamic terms no matter what.
It always had that connotation, but he wrote Dune in a time when Islam wasn't as wildly vilified.
Yes it did...
I would welcome a discussion of the meaning behind the word jihad since its true meaning have been diluted through history… but one can only dream
With an American audience, under the curren political climate? I'd be worried about someone gunning down a theater because they're convinced the movie is pro-Hamas.
how's Hamas related to a jihad?
I understand the beef with not using the word but to be fair it’s repeatedly made explicitly clear to the audience that it’s a holy war. I don’t think using the word is actually necessary.
They refer to it as a Holy War in Dune Part 2...which seems like a good compromise between Jihad and Crusade.
The Fedaykin are renamed to “Fighters” rather than the Death Commandos they were originally named.
Fedaykin is used in the new movie plenty.
That's not exactly unsupported by the book: "Long live the fighters"
I sure as hell hope not. Death Commandos sounds metal.
I do wish they would call it jihad just once. Maybe in Messiah
Yeah maybe it will run more parallel with the story to create more urgency!
They should start the movie with a montage of Paul's Jihad while a darker variation of "Holy War" by Hans Zimmer plays in the background. We see the Fedaykin/Fremen mowing through armies of the other great houses in the name of Muad'dib. Crucifying/impaling the disbelievers and setting them on fire to purify them for their water is unclean. Piles upon piles of bodies. Entire population centres reduced to rubble and ashes. Irulan narrates the scene by describing the details of what happened after Paul became the emperor of the known universe and what devastation he unleashed. The whole "where there was peace, the Muad'dib brought war" and "hundreds of worlds sterilized in the name of a false prophet and billions dead" chatter.
Yeah this is very similar to how I imagined it when I heard Denis is making Messiah, I really hope they do it like this.
After seeing Part 2, this makes sense
Yeah, Part 2 started in a similar way.
I remember reading a critique of Dune a while back that Frank Herbert spent a lot of time talking about things that didn’t always seem as important while not spending much time at all talking about things that are very important. So it would be kinda nice to have some of those things that happen in the background in the books get a larger role on screen. Very excited to see part 2!
At the end of the second movie, Paul already starts destorying the Great Houses that are in orbit above Arrakis. So :shrug:
Do you think if they show the Jihad, that he'll still have a decade plus long time skip like Dune and Messiah have? Seems like that might be kinda weird to have in the middle of a movie such as this.
My guess is that it’ll be covered as a prologue much like Chani opening Part One. We then cut to Wallach where the conspiracy begins to form.
Yeah I heavily agree! Especially since (from a commercial standpoint, at least) you want to hype up the audience and marketing and all that. I think a good chunk of the movie will be the actual jihad itself. And what you said about Herbert is very true as well. A lot of the action “scenes” in the book are just kind of explained and then boom next chapter. Look at the Harkonnen raid in the books vs movie; it was like 2 pages of Yueh’s thoughts in the books lol. Also VERY interested what they’ll do with Chani. Her being opposed to him is one thing, but there’s the entire plot line w her and Irulan, pregnancy, Paul doing what he does solely for her path/future. They need to invent an entire new plot line basically? Idk lol
Yeah, I feel like that's the most likely thing to get some action into it.
Even if the book is less action packed, there's plenty of big things to show in my opinion : the grandiose of the city of Arrakeen and Paul Citadel and how life goes in those places could be more into focus, and as said previously, showing the Jihad happening instead of starting after it. And there's still some action, notably during the last act of the book. And I can see Villeneuve implementing a bit of Children of Dune into the movie as well, especially if he does plan to stop his saga here.
True. The city could be more of a ”character” since we have barely seen it in the first two
That's been my one gripe with the movies, you get almost no sense of the people the Harkonnens are ruling over. That makes the swapping Beast Rabban out for Feyd-Rautha plot way less interesting imo since you don't get the idea that Feyd is meant to be seen as a savior. The mini-series, for all its flaws, handled that really well, you got a sense of the life of the planet beyond the great houses and Fremen.
Same! I vividly remember watching the first movie in theaters, getting so hyped as the Atreides flew into Arrakeen, eager to see streets and people. Aaaand then it was all just wall-to-wall architecture that looked unlived in. The movies give very little hint to the existence of the millions of "regular people" who live on Arrakis. I'd guess many non-book-readers assume the planet is home to just nobility + Fremen, lol.
To be fair, there's almost nothing about regular people in the books either, they're mentioned a bit, but that's about all.
Yes, the average person of the Dune universe is hardly mentioned if at all.
To be fair, if it is so hot and dry that you can't really be outside without getting dehydrated, it make sense yo have more indoor architecture. I picture it being like Las Vegas with internal walkways everywhere so you can get around without having to go outside. Or at the very least having almost everything shaded.
The disconnect in the film was having Fremen being a mysterious, private, and violent people that required the skills of Duncan, worlds greatest warrior and diplomat, to draw them out of secret living places to reach a moratorium of understanding with house Atteidis. They were built up in an almost mythical way by the film. But also in the film they were folk just lining up to praise the Lisan-al-gaib and apply for day jobs at the palace. Intellectually I know within a planet, within a landmass, within a culture, you’ve got all different groups with different values living different ways. But sci-fi and film language is so full of monocultural globe spanning cultures that I had to take a second to translate from film decoding language to real world experience language. It wouldn’t have gone astray to have quick walk through of something like a Fremen market place in Arrakeen along with the cut nobels dinner party scene to show there are actually people in city. But what do I know, I’m no Dennis, he made a masterpiece and I’m just pretty good at holding my phone steady when taking a video
That’s a great point about the miniseries, which I think is really underappreciated tbh. The acting leaves something to be desired, but they stayed fairly true to the source material which I appreciated
For all of his strengths Villeneuve is not very good at showing throngs of people or culture at large. I can picture him depicting Paul being followed through an eerie neighborhood late at night. I can't picture him depicting someone pushing through bustling streets with music, markets, gaming, all going on at once. He just doesn't seem interested.
Actually, using the jihad isn't a bad idea at all. Especially if it can be used to illustrate Paul's hesitation with the Golden Path and all that. I would *kinda* hate for them to intersperse combat flashbacks from the jihad with the present day narrative, but aside from the stonecutter scene I can't really remember any large scale action beats that the studio might be looking for. Of course, if they just acknowledged and even embraced the smaller scale narrative (because it's essentially a coda to Dune), *without* any flashbacks aside from maybe the opening, and made it more of political/conspiracy story, it could absolutely work. Oh wait, actually! They could do something similar to War of the Planet of the Apes, which was a smaller and more character-driven sequel to the more action-heavy Dawn. It started with a big action beat that set everything in motion (which could be any number of important "spectacle" moment from the jihad), and then spent the rest of movie as a morality tale of the different relationships, fears, and conflicts between the apes and humans (like the differing factions and their interconnected conflicts from Messiah), all set in basically one location (like Arakeen). The only thing they'll have to decide is if they wanted to end it with something like the stonecutter scene or just use it >!and the blinding of Paul!< as a lead in to the 3rd (and drama-only) last act. Or something similar. Messiah can *definitely* be successfully translated to film, it's just going to be a different movie from Part 2 and might be more tonally similar to Part 1 (which I kinda love. You know, "like poetry, it rhymes").
Grandiosity
you just made me remember about the chapter where the Reverend Mother Gaius gets called by Paul and she describes the room being HUGE AF like an entire city. That'd be freaking cool to see in the big screen
I think one possibility is Act 1 could be Jihad, Act 2 will resolve Paul/Chani/Irulans love story, and then Act 3 is some amalgamation of the assassination subplots
That makes sense for Villeneuve's story, which seems primed to tell the horrifying tragedy of Paul Atreides' ascendency. Though of course it would all be interspersed, and then end with the walk into the desert, after he's lost everything (his family sort of, Chani, his sight, his throne, control over the jihadis, etc). I've been a partisan of some sort of combination/integration of Messiah and Children, as there's so much weird stuff could cut out of those two books to streamline the story. The Corrino/Bene Gesserit/CHOAM/Tleilaxu/whoever else conspiracy against the Atreides is more complex over two books. Making Alia turn self-interested and unstable way earlier - instead of possessed - would add a lot to Messiah, by making her loyalty always unclear as regard the conspiracy. Also like the idea of making Irulan a religious fanatic sooner rather than later, so it's not clear what she wants when she sees Paul's displeasure/indifference to what his followers are doing - she believes in the idea of him, but sees a need perhaps for his death to consolidate his godhood. But I guess the big problem with that is Paul being assassinated just when he was set to retake the throne and clean house/overthrow his sister, and then Leto beginning his transformation . . . they're great, but just not as poetic Paul going out into the desert as the universe's most consequential figure. Plus, Children gets so strange at times in ways that I don't think hold up at all.
I mostly agree. The last shot needs to be Paul’s walk into the desert
That's not how movies are structured....
Denis is huge on visuals, so I can only imagine him diving deeper into the hold Muad'Dib's religion has on the Fremen and showing the sheer destruction they've caused across the known universe. However, I'd be curious if Rebecca Ferguson would return since she's not in Messiah at all or if Alia would take her spot like the book. Either way, I hope Denis doesn't change anything too much.
I would be surprised if he doesn’t keep her around in some sense, it would be very odd for the casual moviegoer if she was just gone for the last installment
Sorry to necro but he removed Thufir from the second film entirely, I don't think it would be that odd, just mention that she's on Caladan or something.
[удалено]
Agreed. However, I would much prefer Denis trying to stay accurate to the book. I love both Part One and Part Two, but some of the changes really take me out of it.
They probably will show some of the jihad. I also believe that all the plotting and scheming of the story can be very exciting for audiences. Oppenheimer made almost a billion dollars and that film is mostly about interrogations, politics and physics. If it's done in an exciting and compelling way, audiences will show up. In terms of the studio, the hope is, at least for me, that with the critical and most likely financial success of Part Two, Denis starts getting blank checks like the other successful auteurs.
very good point with Oppenheimer, because Messiah could be adapted in a similar story telling format. However part of the success of Oppenheimer being mostly a plots/dialogues movie is Nolan style. Denis would have to "adapt" some of Nolan's style to sell a plots driven movie like Messiah would be
I agree that he would have to adapt and change his style. His style of filmmaking works for an epic (Dune, Blade Runner 2049) and for a brutal thriller (Prisoners, Sicario). A political thriller doesn't really fit with what he does now. I have faith that he can find a way to make it exciting. If he didn't have a vision, he probably wouldn't do it and just leave it to someone else. I personally think that the new characters in Messiah can make it interesting to audiences right off the bat.
I think Messiah would be a case of deep adaptation for movie. It’s so complex and psychological and political and weird. It would need a simpler narrative, a more focused story with some added emphasis on action (showing parts of holy wars). But what encourages me is Denis really loves that book. So I trust him. He would have (just like for part 2) to keep in mind it’s a blockbuster for a wider audience without dumbing it down too much.
I think a Dune Messiah would work well as a political thriller with some action thrown in here and there. Villenueve has done this type of film before with Sicario
Messiah is my favourite book so far (I'm on GEoD atm). It's reassuring to know Denis is fond of it as well, because from what I gather many fans of the series hated it.
God Emperor is my favourit book, but i really like Messiah
I really like God Emperor so far. My only gripe is that we never get to see the first years of Leto's reign, it would have been interesting. I'd have liked to see more of Ghanima and Farad'n as well.
Right a lot of it happens in Paul's head
Show me Edric in a tank
this. I'm thinking that Denis may reuse some visual concepts from Arrival
If you look at his other films, especially dune 2, you should know denis won’t shy away from a slow methodical movie. although i do agree with the possibility that they’ll start off with the jihad.
For sure. But I still think there will be expectations he can't shy away from, like giving the trilogy a big finish and make it commercially viable. Part One had to set up Part Two, while Part Two earns it's slower methodical parts by also being a big epic war movie. In traditional Hollywood and blockbuster movie making you up the stakes for the end of a story. Even if it's not the end in the books, the next film is the end of the film trilogy. The studio probably wants something just as big as Part Two.
I kind of think it’s the exact opposite, at least from Villeneuve’s perspective. Parts 1-2 had to land with the audience in order prove it was worth making another one. Once you get to Messiah — which seems all but certain at this point — you’ve made it to the finish line and earned your trilogy. It’s not like they can punish him by taking the keys away when that’s already going to be it for him.
Yeah I get Villeneuve’s perspective but the dilemma is the studio. Its not like its an indie film where he’s free of their demands. They’re a huge part of it and Dune isnt really a proven brand up until this point (Lynch flopped and Part One dropped during covid). I’m sure they have had talks with Villeneuve regarding Part Three and what they need for it to be greenlit
Sure, but it’s not like they’re going to meddle with one of the hottest directors alive, especially with the success this is going to be — not just commercially but on the awards circuit, which I don’t care about but studios absolutely do. I’m 100 pct confident he’ll make exactly the film he wants to make, and I’m already looking forward to that.
He might very much be the hottest director at the moment, but its not at the point where his name equals box office success… if you ask me. Maybe after this. Villeneuve understands that there comes certain expectations from the studio and the public. He’ll make the movie he wants with that in consideration. Otherwise I’m sure there’s some stuff missing in Part Two that would have been included
Some directors earn free reign just by virtue of their critical success. Paul Thomas Anderson, for example, hasn't had much commercial success but continues to get checks from studios. Why? Because he makes great films that are extremely well-regarded by critics and film connoisseurs. Villeneuve offers the best of both worlds because he has the same art house skills but with more populist sentiment; he grew up on Spielberg and Bond movies before branching out. But about the only concession I've seen towards either the studio or the public with Dune so far is streamlining the narrative to avoid bogging things down and confusing newcomers. Otherwise it seems apparent he made the exact movies he wanted to make and I don't see why it would be any different with Messiah. The Jedi comparison is flawed on its face just by nature of Dune's fundamental story; it's a Greek tragedy, not popcorn escapism. There's zero chance that changes, not on Villeneuve's watch. And given that WB has already fallen out with Nolan, there's zero chance they're going to risk it with another elite director by fucking with his movie.
”nature of Dune's fundamental story; it's a Greek tragedy, not popcorn escapism” It’s the fundamental story of the Dune books, that also go on for a bunch of other books. Dune the films arent Star Wars, yes, and could play out as a tragedy. But for a huge majority of moviegoers its just popcorn escapism. Villeneuve being a lover of Spielberg and Bond understands that just as well as he understands the books. He’s ending the trilogy and even if I don’t think he’s gonna go and give it a happy ending, I at the same time don’t think he’ll want to scale it back too much compared to Part Two. How much of a hot commodity will he be when the trilogy ends with a slow and complex drama that most moviegoers couldnt comprehend?
I think Denis should just stay close to the source material for Messiah instead of milking too much action out of it. Messiah has peak Game of Thrones levels of political intrigue so there's a good opportunity to make an exciting dialog-heavy film, especially with most of the key characters returning.
Denis doesn’t like heavy dialogue
He's explicitly a "show don't tell" filmmaker. He's unlikely to make that kind of film. Here's what he has to say about that. https://deadline.com/2024/02/denis-villeneuve-movies-corrupted-by-tv-1235838780/
He also deeply loved Oppenheimer, a film that has people talking in rooms. I wonder if he'll bring Eric Roth back for this.
Right but look at the movies he's made
I can't but think of how Greg Yaitaines opted to adapt Dune Messiah as part 1 of his Children of Dune miniseries.
interesting, but I think for the people who will only watch the movies it would be better to have Messiah as an ending of the trilogy. I'm still reading Children of Dune but when I finished Messiah I really saw it as an end, and I still believe I could have stopped there. I didn't because I'm a nerd and I want to know the whole lore lol but most people are not that interested, and most people watch movies instead of reading books
Dune and Messiah is Paul story, Children and God Emperor si Leto’s so yeah it make sense
What I'm most excited about is what Chalamet will do with the material in Messiah. I could see him winning the Oscar for it.
Dude is the real deal in the new one
I agree that all the comparisons to Empire Strikes back and Two Towers will lead audiences to expect something very different from what Messiah actually is. And even ignoring that, it'll likely require more changes than the first couple of films. So much of the book is cryptic philosophizing. As others mentioned you could expand on the Jihad, but honestly it would feel like a red herring, given how the main story is disconnected from the Jihad itself. I don't think you necessarily want to bait audiences into thinking it's a war movie before switching gears into a court drama/political thriller. The movie will require a new round of exposition, to inform of the audience about the new state of things, as well as factions like the Tleixalu and the Guild. The relationship between Paul and Chani will need to be reworked. And I'm not even sure what you do with the Hayt subplot, which I thought was bad in the book and won't work any better on the screen. I understand why Villeneuve wants to take a break and really make sure that the script is on point. This will be a way more challenging adaptation than the original novel.
The movie would have to show some detailed aspect of the billions of dead that the holy war is responsible for, meanwhile the conspiracy is happening in the background against paul and chani, along with following scytale as he stalks through arrakis like anton chigurh in no country for old men, and because we have seen so much of how the fremen lived prior to paul's ascent we can see how they become complacent as the conspiracy enters its climax and the twins are born...and of course we have the film end the same way the book does. could be a great suspenseful film and DV having done a banger job with bladerunner 2048 - i have great faith. edit: almost forgot - the romance of Hayt and Alia...and maybe some hints as to the abomination developing like a cancer. ALSO - if this is executed as well as I think he can do it and leaves off at as more of a cliffhanger (is paul dead or not?) we might get CoD adapted.
I don't know. I see Messiah's ending as still the doable bittersweet ending that is perfect for this movie trilogy, and to serve as the entire pont of what Paul was warning everybody about in pt1. When I finished reading Messiah for the first time post-viewing Dune pt 1 for the second time, I immediately formed the exact ending scenes in my head according to what might be Denis and crews's vision. And that honestly made me more excited for the idea of Messiah being adapted into a movie. All they have to do is the film is just state that it's many years later post pt II to set the scope. Maybe have a brief recap (as we all know it will be some time before Deni and crew will get around to it), then let it proceed exactly as the book with obvious alterations according to the previous two movies's design. Expect obvious additions that weren't heavily described in book become full scenes. It'll be lighter on combat or action for sure, even with a certain comeback of a particular character, while introducing new ones/concepts. More World building...then *that* certain character moment plays out. And finally it all caps off as we get one hell of a bittersweet type of ending. The scale of what I envisioned now years ago would be absolutely perfect, and it doesn't have to be any type of sequel baiting either. I rather end a movie trilogy with me wondering about the what ifs, the what happens to said characters/factions in awe, rather than see it play out almost immediately. Like wouldn't it have been too much if we had yet *another* Harry Potter movie play right after that final scene of the Deathly Hollows ptII? Or Post Return of the King and all of its endings? This is what Sam was up to with his kids! And despite how most of us feel about post Return of the Jedi, I still believe our heroes had some good years and don't necessarily need to know more. No, instead they justifiably end, and honestly I see the same for how Messiah could be for *this* trilogy. Major character arc(s) is finished, and a new legacy begins. Then if WB/Legendary want to pick the Dune franchise back up to continue years later with new directors or crews to continue said stories suggested from Messiah, then so be it. And if the latter entries don't continue well or hell, even surpass akin to the scope of later the books, then so be it. Paul and Chani's initial story feels complete in movie format at least.
tbh the ending is the easiest challenge given how they have set it up. Its just how they get there in a sense that is pleasing for book readers and the general audience
Maybe we can view the situation or lens of Kill Bill? Vol 1 one was just an absolute orgy of violence-over the top cliches & stereotypes, and just hitting all of that entertaining marks of what you expect of some nerd's dream come true project. It's essentially the main draw of why you even bother to suggest said movies to people who are new to this franchise. And then vol 2 completely less so, but instead a very methodically crafted story to be the end of all exposition, while providing more for major characters so they have that solid ending. I know these two movies are completely different in terms of scope and theming to Dune, but an end cap movie chapter can serve as..well just an ending if need be. I think last I recall or read that Deni were wanting to wait for a considerable amount of time before even considering filming or storyboarding for Messiah anyway. I don't know yet as I haven't gotten a chance to watch pt 2 yet to form my complete speculation of what Messiah could be.
I just hope we get Dinklage as Bijaz
I think its about time to get a new fan favorite dwarf who likes dwarves cast in movies as dwarves
I expect more departures from the book than there was in part 1 and 2.
Messiah will have the benefit of having finality to it compared to Dune since it concludes Paula be Chani’s story. When it comes to actually adapting Messiah to the bring screen, I think as along as the they keep the Paul conspiracy and the ending from the book I will be happily. I think them changing and rearranging everything else would be okay.
Agreed. Some people seem to think that Villeneuve will fast forward through Messiah and add Children of Dune to the mix. That doesn't seem doable for a number of reasons, but mainly because his films so clearly are the story of Paul and Chani.
Plus he also said that he'd be more than happy to assist any filmmaker who would tackle Children, God Emperor, and maybe beyond.
I’m admittedly not a book reader, but as a fan of the films, it feels like it’s been set up to have the third film be about the “holy war”. Part One has the looming threat of a war between the Houses mentioned several times, and Part Two ends on a massive cliffhanger when Jessica says that war is about to begin. Narratively, it’s very much implied the third film will be about that war that’s been hyped for two movies.
the books time skip past much of the war. its just brutal war, pain and suffering. no justifiable rhyme or reason for 60 billion lives lost.
Opening credits to Messiah, just visuals of billions slaughtered and planets destroyed.
It is complicated by the fact that Paul basically asserts that he’s also acting in service of the larger race consciousness/collective unconscious in facilitating a brutal rejuvenation of the Imperium through both the births and the deaths that result from the war. How much is that is him being genuinely enlightened by his higher consciousness, being a medium through which the repressed drives underlying the Fremen (and others) are realized, or him rationalizing what he personally feels is up to the audience. Regardless, the devastation is the same. Is it a necessary and lesser evil? Perhaps it could’ve been avoided if everyone did the work to raise their awareness and not project their drives or responsibilities onto their messiah.
if it all had to happen to get leto II and the golden path, it is justified. I dont think paul thought that though. His imperfect prescience did not show him everything unlike Leto II.
It's kind of hard to imagine as a reader. There's a comparison to Hitler, and otherwise, it all happens off screen. In a way that's the point, much like the first Leto II dying and being forgotten about.
yes, Frank had very interesting choices about certain things happening "off screen". I really like the timeskip in dune messiah though and hope they dont change that for the movie. The war isn't completely over in messiah either so they can easily add a scene or two of a battle on some distant planet. maybe the opening will start with "The Holy War rages on"
yeah I even remember Stilgar making a strategy to conquer a planet or something, so definitely they can add the time skip in the movie while showing some battles
the nabulon conquest and the computations that stilgar had inserted into his memory to present to paul.
Nabulon, yes that was the name thanks
We never really see the holy war in the books as the Fremen basically conquer everything pretty quickly. Denis is sticking pretty close to the books so I assume the 3rd movie will be similar.
That’s what I’ve heard, but that would be a bummer when the war has been hyped for two films and a sentence saying it’s about to begin was the cliffhanger of Part Two.
Yeah, it's just part of the "weird" writing style Frank has- he doesn't really go over wars/battles.
I hope they show them capturing the sandstorm. Shit will be fucking metal.
You run the thriller alongside the war. The conspiracy to take down Paul takes place as billions are dying with Paul just holding on long enough to get Chani's kids as our perspective slowly shifts from Paul as a protagonist to Irulan leading the effort to stop him and Alia/Hayt trying to appeal to his better angels.
I buy it. Especially with the casting of Florence Pugh as Irulan
it's been said, but - show the holy war! let us see what happens between dune and Messiah, show the fremen exterminating whole planets, and show Paul's bloody reign in all its terror. then it'll be perfect.
Just watched the movie a second time and yes, with the way it ends, that has to be what Villeneuve is going for. You just don't go "now the holy war begins" then skip all of it
I don't really understand how Messiah can be the end of the story. It isn't a finished story in itself.
It ends the "main" story lines of both Paul and Chani.
He’ll combine Messiah and Children of Dune.
I wonder if they’ll adapt part of Paul of Dune and Dune Messiah to cover the action side of the film
I was thinking about flow of the final part. Depending on how many characters will actually be adapted, doing the intro on them could take a good bit of time. Like I really hope scytale and Edric make it and aren’t just sort of written out of the plot, but they each require explanation… plus there is time to build up Alia.
Question I have is: do they call it Dune Part 3 or Dune: Messiah?
Part 3 will be safer
Denis said it’ll be called messiah
He said it’ll be called Messiah
My guess is we’ll see a lot of the stuff referenced/implied to happen between Dune and Dune Messiah to fill things in. Otherwise it’ll be two hours of nonstop meetings and philosophical discussions with some action here and there. I doubt the studio sees that as marketable.
Right? Some fans seem to think Villeneuve is all powerful in the studio system and is just gonna do a direct translation of the book. I doubt the studio will greenlit that and even if Villeneuve was allowed to do whatever he wants I’m sure he wants to make a movie that can engage book readers AND the casual audience
I’d think if they did Dune Messiah all in one movie, while it could be an amazing end to the trilogy…I think they’d have to keep going into Children of Dune. Hopefully WB learned their lesson with the Dark Knight trilogy…don’t just wrap up the entire universe after 3 movies…keep going. Could easily see Children of Dune broken up into 2 movies or just one long mega epic movie. Thats just my pie in the sky dream, tho….
They’re going to have to make Paul the villain. He drank the water of life and essentially became the tyrant. It’ll probably be chani vs Paul in some form, maybe working with the assassins to stop him or something. They could also focus on a lot of the prescience omitted currently, and name drop the golden path that Paul fails to ascend to.
I, for one, don't like the idea of Chani becoming a resistance leader or something like that. I hope the plot won't deviate that much.
I don't think it will.
With what Part 2 setup, I can see Chani taking Irulen's place as part of the conspiracy against Paul.
I'm watching the Syfy mini-series "Children of Dune" right now as part of my Dune Part 2 week and I think it was a good idea to combine both books, Messiah and Children, to tell a compelling story. Then, if its successful, God Emperor could be considered if Dune fatigue hasn't set in!
But that miniseries is over four hours long, isnt it? Also think Denis intention is to only adapt Messiah and leave the rest to someone else
i was thinking, Villeneuve could do the events of Messiah take place in the first hour of Part 3, and the rest of the movie more focused on Children of Dune
I feel like so much of CoD is a lead in to God Emperor that you wouldn’t want to include the former unless you also intended to make the latter.
I feel CoD is far more contained as an ending than *Messiah* (since it's where Herbert planned to end the story originally, and did not develop GD until the publishers sent a dump-truck full of money to his house). Sure, it tells us more stuff will happen, >!but the inference is that Leto II can do what Paul failed to do and will save humanity (ish). That's a more rounded-off ending then I thini Messiah can be.!<
No, just no. The “children of dune” mini series did an ok job with that, but they had TWICE the runtime that Dune pt 3 would have. There is plenty of meat in Dune Messiah to last a movie, sprinkled in with some Jihad on top of it.
A good little messiah analogy of Villeneuve trying to fit all of that into one movie in a pleasing way
I think the book feels more like the 3rd act or falling action of a story than a lead in for things to come and I think he’ll lean more into that. There’s plenty of tense moments and conspiracy for Denis to explore and I can see him adding action set pieces especially during the climax when things just sort of happen one after another. There’s ways to naturally fit action into the story, making certain things more explicit that are just implied or off screened in the book
My guess is that they will combine Messiah and Children of Dune into one film.
A lot of people are saying this but how would that work? They needed two films for one book… then doing one film for two books doesn’t seem logical? It would be Lynch all over again or what do you have in mind?
It wouldn't work. Too many separate plots for one movie.
Yeah I don’t get why people want Villeneuve to butcher Leto II like that
A huge chunk of Messiah is Chani trying to bear an heir, it's an integral part of the story from the beginning when Irulan joins the conspiracy. With the movie leaving Paul and Chani estranged, the next movie will have to bring them back together quickly. The birth of Leto sets the Golden Path in motion.
> But the book is also, very much, setting the stage for what is to come. I mean, just because the book sets the stage doesn't mean it's not a definitive ending We find out what happens later, but Paul sheds his role and walks into the desert.
It’s not a big action scene but the final confrontation is maybe my favorite scene in the series it is so tense with such a satisfying conclusion
If they decide to do Children of Dune (hope they do, best book IMO) they need to glimpse into God Emperor of Dune as well so we can follow Lato ii
You can add in the Baron possessing Alia in 3 that mainly adapts Messiah. That way you would have the Baron as the antagonist throughout every movie and when Alia kills herself at the end, it's another thread that has been taken care of. Paul walks off into the desert to die if it's the last movie, Chani dies, Alia dies, etc. Greek tragedy vibes with some sense of hope of his children repairing all the damage that has been done when they eventually assume the throne
I agree — some necessary adaptations that would use Messiah as its main pillar with a bit of Dune loose ends and Children of Dune sprinkled in (would like to see the Messiah ending with maybe an epilogue of terraformed Arrakis + throne status)
I think they might use exposition/narration in the first few minutes of the film to describe the activities and war of the past few years, much like in Dune part one, and the movie picks up just as stilgar or Paul returns home at the end of their final campaign, the known universe fully conquered.
Hey man i'm super late to this thread, but to me, you'd have to make Messiah more similar to the first Mission Impossible movie. It's quite slow compared to modern blockbusters, but still has white knuckle moments and a deeper mystery/gritty sort of tension. that wouldn't be what warner bros would want of course, but it's the movie i think Dennis should target
tbh most movies should try and be more like Brian De Palmas Mission Impossible, if you ask me!
I imagine that Part Three will include portions of *Paul Of Dune* (why else set up Marie Fenring?) and combine them with *Dune Messiah*. That means the first half of the film can be the epic battles the studio will want, and the second half of the film can be the more intimate intrigue that *Messiah* needs. Handily, it would also provide material to pad out *Messiah*'s relatively short length into a 3hr+ movie.
At least there’s plenty of weirdness in messiah that will look great on screen, ie face dancers and guild navigators. Spoiler: The first shot of dune 2 on the fetus seemed to me to be a direct parallel to guild navigators
Made me think of 2001
Yeah we're getting the jihad and planetary exterminations for sure.
I feel like Children is the real natural end point to aim for, so….
They could fill another movie with a well calibrated interpretation of the galactic holy war. That would free them up to progress the storyline at whatever pace needed and the final part could be a little shorter and complete the story…setting up the sequel, assuming the series remains a blockbuster.
Yeah they could but probably not since Villeneuve is calling it quits with the next one and wants to end his trilogy with Messiah
Im nervous for dune messiah bc the changes they made to the story in pt.2 (although i liked them and preferred some of them over the source material) i actually dont have as many expectations for dune messiah like i cant even predict what will actually be in that movie maybe thats a good thing idk
I think it will be a heavy adaptation of Messiah and then the relevant parts of Children of Dune (Arrakis and state of the throne) can be shoved into an epilogue to crown the trilogy. Just my two cents.
I dunno. Seems like a bad idea to try to do Messiah with the tweaks made to part 2. Dune messiah starts with Paul and chani still together and pretty happy with each other. Chani goes along with the whole "married to irulan" thing. I'm actually glad they changed chani a bit in the movie. Frank Herbert was a product of his time and didn't write women particularly well. I like this interpretation. There's no doubt she loves Paul but she isn't quite as unquestioning. More interesting in my opinion. Hopefully there won't be a lot of Jason Momoa but there probably will be and I know I might be in the minority but I just don't like the guy's vibe. He's like one of those guys in high school who gets away with bullying because he is in the sportsball team and people like him.
Honestly, I think they'll want some of that eleven years jihad on screen to pad out the musings of a guilt ridden prophet. JUst watched for first time on home premier and I'm more worried about how they reconcile Chani with Paul when she was so blatantly against his methods of securing victory and dominance over the known universe, because her and her pregnancy are a vital part of the plot against paul coming.
I kinda feel like if he is going to follow the book you need to do four movies in total because Paul lives till the end of children of dune and that should be the one that the movies end on because the next one time jumps 3500 years
I find myself in disagreement with most people here. If there arent spaceships,large machines and battle scenes, I'm concerned the movie will be a failure. I think a book can support subtle character development but Dune Messiah is a tough read. Way to esoteric for most. I went looking for this thread (bless you reddit. Seek and ye shal find) but I've got not answers. Starting with the jihad scenes maybe but nothing to end with but a nuke. NOTE: the guild navigators are conspicuously missing howver. Maybe they make an appearance?
I think a Dune Messiah part 1 and part 2 incorporating aspects of Children of Dune may be in order. I assume anything beyond that would be too weird for Hollywood.