Geek Hub previously reported on the record-breaking advance ticket sales for Dune: Part Three. We also looked at the final trailer, which promised war and political chaos. Now we bring you something that may concern readers of Frank Herbert’s books. It seems that Dune: Part Three will not follow the source material exactly.
The film draws heavily from Herbert’s 1969 novel Dune Messiah, but members of the cast have confirmed that director Denis Villeneuve has made several departures from the book. Now this could be very interesting because, as we saw, Villeneuve changed parts of the story in the first two films and it proved to be brilliant. Also, Arrakis survived.
Zendaya said that much of the new film remains faithful to the source material, although there are also clear differences. Robert Pattinson, who joins the franchise as Scytale, went slightly further. He suggested that viewers would be “crazy” to concentrate on finding fault with the changes. I think that’s a confident statement to make around Dune readers. Hey, we’re talking about people who can probably explain the political history of a fictional family before breakfast.
According to Variety, Pattinson found the screenplay complicated and expected the film to become a grand political and moral story. But after watching it, he discovered something far more emotional. He said parenting forms an important part of the film, which gives us an interesting clue about Villeneuve’s approach.
Dune Messiah examines the consequences of Paul Atreides becoming Emperor. He has achieved the position that once seemed impossible, but his victory has created religious fanaticism, political unrest and violence across the universe. In simple terms, Paul won. But that great win has unfortunately created an entirely new collection of problems.
For those that have read the novel, you would have noticed that it is more focused on political conspiracy than Dune itself. There are fewer heroic moments and much more time spent examining what happens when somebody becomes the symbol of a movement they can no longer fully control. I’m sure that adapting that story into a major cinema release required major adjustments. The movie would not have worked as it did if Villeneuve simply repeated the enormous battles from Dune: Part Two. The story here is about the cause and effect of power and the devastating consequences that come with it.
Timothée Chalamet appears satisfied with the result. He said Villeneuve did not lower the standard set by the previous films. Instead, he “changed the location of the bar”. That sounds like something somebody might say after spending several years in the desert discussing destiny. But it also suggests that the third film will not simply try to become bigger.
The final trailer already showed Paul struggling beneath the weight of his rule. Chani appears furious, Princess Irulan remains trapped inside a political marriage and several powerful people seem interested in removing the Emperor. Meanwhile, Pattinson’s Scytale enters the story as part of a conspiracy surrounding Paul. So while things are going wonderfully, changes from the book will naturally make some fans nervous. The fact is that adaptations often claim they are “honouring the spirit” of the source material shortly before changing everything except the title.
But Villeneuve has proved that he knows what he is doing because his first two films altered characters, timelines and certain relationships while keeping Herbert’s larger ideas about power, religion and manipulation intact. Another thing is that he understands that Paul is not a conventional hero. The third film must make that point clear, especially after audiences watched him ride a sandworm, defeat Feyd-Rautha and claim the throne in spectacular fashion. Those moments looked heroic, but I’ll bet that the consequences will probably feel very different.
The parenting element mentioned by Pattinson could also connect the political story to something more human. Empires may concern armies, bloodlines and control, but families still live inside them. Parents pass down power, fear and unfinished conflicts. Their children then inherit the consequences, usually without receiving proper instructions. Villeneuve appears to have adapted Dune Messiah as the conclusion to the story he began, rather than treating the novel like a list of scenes that must appear in the correct order. That may involve combining characters, changing events or giving certain relationships more emotional space.
Of course, some readers will object, which is inevitable. But a completely faithful adaptation is not always the same as a good film. Books and movies tell stories differently. The question is not whether Dune: Part Three changes the book, but whether those changes preserve what the book was trying to say. So far, the cast appears convinced that Villeneuve has achieved exactly that. We will discover whether audiences agree when Dune: Part Three arrives in cinemas on 18 December.
Arrakis may look slightly different from the one Frank Herbert wrote. But judging by everything we have seen, it remains just as dangerous.
