bangobango said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Absolute spectacle. I'm going to take my own narrow path here...

There was no northern (non-fundamentalist) vs southern (fundamentalist) Fremen in the book. Making Chani a northern Fremen combined with being relegated to concubine, and thus having her leave at the end is a large divergence from the book.

And I think the reason DV did that is because Dune Messiah is a largely boring book and will not translate to film well at all (which I've been annoyingly saying for some time). It has no action, it's short, and was only ever meant almost as an epilogue to Dune and a brief setup for Children of Dune.

So, I think DV recognizes this and made this change on purpose so that the next part would be watchable. And I think it was probably the right move from a movie going experience.

I do think part one was better as a film due to pacing like others have said but this movie was certainly a great watch.

---

People are actually saying part one was better? Wow. That is certainly a take.

---

swc93 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Absolute spectacle. I'm going to take my own narrow path here...

There was no northern (non-fundamentalist) vs southern (fundamentalist) Fremen in the book. Making Chani a northern Fremen combined with being relegated to concubine, and thus having her leave at the end is a large divergence from the book.

And I think the reason DV did that is because Dune Messiah is a largely boring book and will not translate to film well at all (which I've been annoyingly saying for some time). It has no action, it's short, and was only ever meant almost as an epilogue to Dune and a brief setup for Children of Dune.

So, I think DV recognizes this and made this change on purpose so that the next part would be watchable. And I think it was probably the right move from a movie going experience.

I do think part one was better as a film due to pacing like others have said but this movie was certainly a great watch.

---

Watched the movie last night; the ending bothered me. The way Chani pushes back in the film and her departure at the end leads me to believe she is going to form a splinter group. Add to that, as pointed out, that none of the other factions are even mentioned; maybe her splinter group replaces the Spacing Guild and CHOAM in the movie and she is actually the one trying to bring an end to Paul's new empire. (just spit balling)

I really enjoyed reading Dune Messiah because it is so full of plot/intrigue and all the 'action' is basically verbal conflict. I don't really know how it will translate into film without elongating fights or bringing in conflicts that were just asides in the book. I suspect that if DV is going to make a hard right turn away from the source material, the 3rd installment would be it.

---

Quote:

---

Add to that, as pointed out, that none of the other factions are even mentioned; maybe her splinter group replaces the Spacing Guild and CHOAM in the movie and she is actually the one trying to bring an end to Paul's new empire. (just spit balling)

---

YouBet said:

---

A is A said:

---

swc93 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Absolute spectacle. I'm going to take my own narrow path here...

There was no northern (non-fundamentalist) vs southern (fundamentalist) Fremen in the book. Making Chani a northern Fremen combined with being relegated to concubine, and thus having her leave at the end is a large divergence from the book.

And I think the reason DV did that is because Dune Messiah is a largely boring book and will not translate to film well at all (which I've been annoyingly saying for some time). It has no action, it's short, and was only ever meant almost as an epilogue to Dune and a brief setup for Children of Dune.

So, I think DV recognizes this and made this change on purpose so that the next part would be watchable. And I think it was probably the right move from a movie going experience.

I do think part one was better as a film due to pacing like others have said but this movie was certainly a great watch.

---

Watched the movie last night; the ending bothered me. The way Chani pushes back in the film and her departure at the end leads me to believe she is going to form a splinter group. Add to that, as pointed out, that none of the other factions are even mentioned; maybe her splinter group replaces the Spacing Guild and CHOAM in the movie and she is actually the one trying to bring an end to Paul's new empire. (just spit balling)

I really enjoyed reading Dune Messiah because it is so full of plot/intrigue and all the 'action' is basically verbal conflict. I don't really know how it will translate into film without elongating fights or bringing in conflicts that were just asides in the book. I suspect that if DV is going to make a hard right turn away from the source material, the 3rd installment would be it.

---

I'll echo YouBet. PT 1 was better. the pacing and story were aligned. We missed some great scenes from the book (dinner scene, jessica in the the tree/water room, etc) but nothing was changed. PT 2 had a significant divergence from the book.

I just started Messiah yesterday, and it really has made me liking PT2 even less. I do not know how you go from the ending of PT2 to the second chapter of Messiah and Chani is in his bedchamber and they are talking.

SWC93 (and others). DV clearly stated he is working on "Messiah" vs just "Dune PT3". I'd hope that if he sets the book as a basis for the script, we should not see too much of a divergence - but again, after Chani's departure, I am worried for what DV is going to do. Taking a lot of creative license here.

---

I'm normally a stickler for staying true to source material, so I would normally be dogging this change. However, I just read Messiah, Children, and God Emperor in the last year so they are top of mind. The divergence from Dune to these subsequent books is so far beyond what the non-reading public is aware of that they would hate it. Dune fans were very upset when Messiah came out because it took such a dramatic turn from Dune. Never mind that Herbert foreshadows the hell out of it in Dune, it was still a jarring difference in tone and a total divergence from the hero's journey plot in Dune.

Thus, I think from a pure movie going experience, if DV is dramatically changing Messiah to keep us on a more Hollywood hero's journey path and not as much towards where the books start heading in Messiah, then I think the movie going public will simply enjoy it more and it will be better for revenue.

Like you said, we already know there will have to be completely new plot lines to reconcile the ending of this and Messiah so it's already going to be significantly different than the book. Who knows what we are getting at this point.

---

A is A said:

---

YouBet said:

---

A is A said:

---

swc93 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Absolute spectacle. I'm going to take my own narrow path here...

There was no northern (non-fundamentalist) vs southern (fundamentalist) Fremen in the book. Making Chani a northern Fremen combined with being relegated to concubine, and thus having her leave at the end is a large divergence from the book.

And I think the reason DV did that is because Dune Messiah is a largely boring book and will not translate to film well at all (which I've been annoyingly saying for some time). It has no action, it's short, and was only ever meant almost as an epilogue to Dune and a brief setup for Children of Dune.

So, I think DV recognizes this and made this change on purpose so that the next part would be watchable. And I think it was probably the right move from a movie going experience.

I do think part one was better as a film due to pacing like others have said but this movie was certainly a great watch.

---

Watched the movie last night; the ending bothered me. The way Chani pushes back in the film and her departure at the end leads me to believe she is going to form a splinter group. Add to that, as pointed out, that none of the other factions are even mentioned; maybe her splinter group replaces the Spacing Guild and CHOAM in the movie and she is actually the one trying to bring an end to Paul's new empire. (just spit balling)

I really enjoyed reading Dune Messiah because it is so full of plot/intrigue and all the 'action' is basically verbal conflict. I don't really know how it will translate into film without elongating fights or bringing in conflicts that were just asides in the book. I suspect that if DV is going to make a hard right turn away from the source material, the 3rd installment would be it.

---

I'll echo YouBet. PT 1 was better. the pacing and story were aligned. We missed some great scenes from the book (dinner scene, jessica in the the tree/water room, etc) but nothing was changed. PT 2 had a significant divergence from the book.

I just started Messiah yesterday, and it really has made me liking PT2 even less. I do not know how you go from the ending of PT2 to the second chapter of Messiah and Chani is in his bedchamber and they are talking.

SWC93 (and others). DV clearly stated he is working on "Messiah" vs just "Dune PT3". I'd hope that if he sets the book as a basis for the script, we should not see too much of a divergence - but again, after Chani's departure, I am worried for what DV is going to do. Taking a lot of creative license here.

---

I'm normally a stickler for staying true to source material, so I would normally be dogging this change. However, I just read Messiah, Children, and God Emperor in the last year so they are top of mind. The divergence from Dune to these subsequent books is so far beyond what the non-reading public is aware of that they would hate it. Dune fans were very upset when Messiah came out because it took such a dramatic turn from Dune. Never mind that Herbert foreshadows the hell out of it in Dune, it was still a jarring difference in tone and a total divergence from the hero's journey plot in Dune.

Thus, I think from a pure movie going experience, if DV is dramatically changing Messiah to keep us on a more Hollywood hero's journey path and not as much towards where the books start heading in Messiah, then I think the movie going public will simply enjoy it more and it will be better for revenue.

Like you said, we already know there will have to be completely new plot lines to reconcile the ending of this and Messiah so it's already going to be significantly different than the book. Who knows what we are getting at this point.

---

I'm okay with this, just don't call it Messiah if it has limited connection to the source. Just call it PT 3 and create your own "next chapter". If he wants to change Chani's direction and even Paul's, that's fine, have the license to do that - just don't call it Messiah. My two cents. But knowing that DV has mentioned it as "Messiah" is what gave me pause at the end of PT2.

All that to saw. PT2 was amazing and great. I'd still give the nod to PT1 as a better installment.

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

A is A said:

---

YouBet said:

---

A is A said:

---

swc93 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Absolute spectacle. I'm going to take my own narrow path here...

There was no northern (non-fundamentalist) vs southern (fundamentalist) Fremen in the book. Making Chani a northern Fremen combined with being relegated to concubine, and thus having her leave at the end is a large divergence from the book.

And I think the reason DV did that is because Dune Messiah is a largely boring book and will not translate to film well at all (which I've been annoyingly saying for some time). It has no action, it's short, and was only ever meant almost as an epilogue to Dune and a brief setup for Children of Dune.

So, I think DV recognizes this and made this change on purpose so that the next part would be watchable. And I think it was probably the right move from a movie going experience.

I do think part one was better as a film due to pacing like others have said but this movie was certainly a great watch.

---

Watched the movie last night; the ending bothered me. The way Chani pushes back in the film and her departure at the end leads me to believe she is going to form a splinter group. Add to that, as pointed out, that none of the other factions are even mentioned; maybe her splinter group replaces the Spacing Guild and CHOAM in the movie and she is actually the one trying to bring an end to Paul's new empire. (just spit balling)

I really enjoyed reading Dune Messiah because it is so full of plot/intrigue and all the 'action' is basically verbal conflict. I don't really know how it will translate into film without elongating fights or bringing in conflicts that were just asides in the book. I suspect that if DV is going to make a hard right turn away from the source material, the 3rd installment would be it.

---

I'll echo YouBet. PT 1 was better. the pacing and story were aligned. We missed some great scenes from the book (dinner scene, jessica in the the tree/water room, etc) but nothing was changed. PT 2 had a significant divergence from the book.

I just started Messiah yesterday, and it really has made me liking PT2 even less. I do not know how you go from the ending of PT2 to the second chapter of Messiah and Chani is in his bedchamber and they are talking.

SWC93 (and others). DV clearly stated he is working on "Messiah" vs just "Dune PT3". I'd hope that if he sets the book as a basis for the script, we should not see too much of a divergence - but again, after Chani's departure, I am worried for what DV is going to do. Taking a lot of creative license here.

---

I'm normally a stickler for staying true to source material, so I would normally be dogging this change. However, I just read Messiah, Children, and God Emperor in the last year so they are top of mind. The divergence from Dune to these subsequent books is so far beyond what the non-reading public is aware of that they would hate it. Dune fans were very upset when Messiah came out because it took such a dramatic turn from Dune. Never mind that Herbert foreshadows the hell out of it in Dune, it was still a jarring difference in tone and a total divergence from the hero's journey plot in Dune.

Thus, I think from a pure movie going experience, if DV is dramatically changing Messiah to keep us on a more Hollywood hero's journey path and not as much towards where the books start heading in Messiah, then I think the movie going public will simply enjoy it more and it will be better for revenue.

Like you said, we already know there will have to be completely new plot lines to reconcile the ending of this and Messiah so it's already going to be significantly different than the book. Who knows what we are getting at this point.

---

I'm okay with this, just don't call it Messiah if it has limited connection to the source. Just call it PT 3 and create your own "next chapter". If he wants to change Chani's direction and even Paul's, that's fine, have the license to do that - just don't call it Messiah. My two cents. But knowing that DV has mentioned it as "Messiah" is what gave me pause at the end of PT2.

All that to saw. PT2 was amazing and great. I'd still give the nod to PT1 as a better installment.

---

1. We have no idea how close Denis will adhere to the Messiah book, so your concern could all be moot.
2. Dune Messiah takes place a decade after Dune ends. Your only hang up seems to be related to Chani walking away from Paul angry and then acting as if the next movie starts from that exact moment and Chani is somehow opposed to Paul. Denis made some changes but none that would be 'irreparable' from the overal arc or tone of Dune: Messiah. We could very well have the 'bedchamber' scene in the next movie because it's so far removed from the events we just watched.

---

A is A said:

---

M.C. Swag said:

---

A is A said:

---

YouBet said:

---

A is A said:

---

swc93 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Absolute spectacle. I'm going to take my own narrow path here...

There was no northern (non-fundamentalist) vs southern (fundamentalist) Fremen in the book. Making Chani a northern Fremen combined with being relegated to concubine, and thus having her leave at the end is a large divergence from the book.

And I think the reason DV did that is because Dune Messiah is a largely boring book and will not translate to film well at all (which I've been annoyingly saying for some time). It has no action, it's short, and was only ever meant almost as an epilogue to Dune and a brief setup for Children of Dune.

So, I think DV recognizes this and made this change on purpose so that the next part would be watchable. And I think it was probably the right move from a movie going experience.

I do think part one was better as a film due to pacing like others have said but this movie was certainly a great watch.

---

Watched the movie last night; the ending bothered me. The way Chani pushes back in the film and her departure at the end leads me to believe she is going to form a splinter group. Add to that, as pointed out, that none of the other factions are even mentioned; maybe her splinter group replaces the Spacing Guild and CHOAM in the movie and she is actually the one trying to bring an end to Paul's new empire. (just spit balling)

I really enjoyed reading Dune Messiah because it is so full of plot/intrigue and all the 'action' is basically verbal conflict. I don't really know how it will translate into film without elongating fights or bringing in conflicts that were just asides in the book. I suspect that if DV is going to make a hard right turn away from the source material, the 3rd installment would be it.

---

I'll echo YouBet. PT 1 was better. the pacing and story were aligned. We missed some great scenes from the book (dinner scene, jessica in the the tree/water room, etc) but nothing was changed. PT 2 had a significant divergence from the book.

I just started Messiah yesterday, and it really has made me liking PT2 even less. I do not know how you go from the ending of PT2 to the second chapter of Messiah and Chani is in his bedchamber and they are talking.

SWC93 (and others). DV clearly stated he is working on "Messiah" vs just "Dune PT3". I'd hope that if he sets the book as a basis for the script, we should not see too much of a divergence - but again, after Chani's departure, I am worried for what DV is going to do. Taking a lot of creative license here.

---

I'm normally a stickler for staying true to source material, so I would normally be dogging this change. However, I just read Messiah, Children, and God Emperor in the last year so they are top of mind. The divergence from Dune to these subsequent books is so far beyond what the non-reading public is aware of that they would hate it. Dune fans were very upset when Messiah came out because it took such a dramatic turn from Dune. Never mind that Herbert foreshadows the hell out of it in Dune, it was still a jarring difference in tone and a total divergence from the hero's journey plot in Dune.

Thus, I think from a pure movie going experience, if DV is dramatically changing Messiah to keep us on a more Hollywood hero's journey path and not as much towards where the books start heading in Messiah, then I think the movie going public will simply enjoy it more and it will be better for revenue.

Like you said, we already know there will have to be completely new plot lines to reconcile the ending of this and Messiah so it's already going to be significantly different than the book. Who knows what we are getting at this point.

---

I'm okay with this, just don't call it Messiah if it has limited connection to the source. Just call it PT 3 and create your own "next chapter". If he wants to change Chani's direction and even Paul's, that's fine, have the license to do that - just don't call it Messiah. My two cents. But knowing that DV has mentioned it as "Messiah" is what gave me pause at the end of PT2.

All that to saw. PT2 was amazing and great. I'd still give the nod to PT1 as a better installment.

---

1. We have no idea how close Denis will adhere to the Messiah book, so your concern could all be moot.
2. Dune Messiah takes place a decade after Dune ends. Your only hang up seems to be related to Chani walking away from Paul angry and then acting as if the next movie starts from that exact moment and Chani is somehow opposed to Paul. Denis made some changes but none that would be 'irreparable' from the overal arc or tone of Dune: Messiah. We could very well have the 'bedchamber' scene in the next movie because it's so far removed from the events we just watched.

---

1. correct.
2. It's more than just the final scene. I do not want to come off as a basher (which apparently I am). I also thought the turn from "I will not go South" to "I must go South" drama within Paul was rushed an not flushed out enough. I get that it is hard to cover the amount of time in the book with with just an hour of film, but it just didnt sit right with me.

Still an amazing job done by DV. I cannot wait for PT3/Messiah. I will be excited to see what he does in that decade. Maybe he creates his own story line for Chani. Who knows. Just voicing my opinion, as isolated and counter-popular as it might be

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Not a book reader, but I think Part 3 is the much better title. Keeps things uniform.

---

bangobango said:

---

Dune Messiah was not received well. They've got a major challenge ahead in doing the next film. Pretty much only guarantee is that people will be pissed with whichever direction they choose.

---

The Ghost of Johnny said:

---

hunter2012 said:

---

I'll be frank and note that I also want to see Miles Teg in action on IMAX, so that's why I want the story to be carried forward.

---

Are you Frank Hebert?

---

Whos Juan said:

---

Welp, looks like I know what I'm doing September 25th

https://www.hanszimmerlive.com/

---

swc93 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Absolute spectacle. I'm going to take my own narrow path here...

There was no northern (non-fundamentalist) vs southern (fundamentalist) Fremen in the book. Making Chani a northern Fremen combined with being relegated to concubine, and thus having her leave at the end is a large divergence from the book.

And I think the reason DV did that is because Dune Messiah is a largely boring book and will not translate to film well at all (which I've been annoyingly saying for some time). It has no action, it's short, and was only ever meant almost as an epilogue to Dune and a brief setup for Children of Dune.

So, I think DV recognizes this and made this change on purpose so that the next part would be watchable. And I think it was probably the right move from a movie going experience.

I do think part one was better as a film due to pacing like others have said but this movie was certainly a great watch.

---

Watched the movie last night; the ending bothered me. The way Chani pushes back in the film and her departure at the end leads me to believe she is going to form a splinter group. Add to that, as pointed out, that none of the other factions are even mentioned; maybe her splinter group replaces the Spacing Guild and CHOAM in the movie and she is actually the one trying to bring an end to Paul's new empire. (just spit balling)

I really enjoyed reading Dune Messiah because it is so full of plot/intrigue and all the 'action' is basically verbal conflict. I don't really know how it will translate into film without elongating fights or bringing in conflicts that were just asides in the book. I suspect that if DV is going to make a hard right turn away from the source material, the 3rd installment would be it.

---