Dune [Part 3] Messiah 2027 (28, 29, 30...)

[Mage]

So is the official title Dune Part 3 instead of Dune Messiah?

The average person will now know that Dune is based on a book, perhaps even a series of books. But not all the titles. So with the second movie being called Dune 2, it's easier to just go with Dune 3 instead of Messiah. It's going to confuse people I think.

 

[JD]

OK, that makes sense. I just hadn't seen anything about it other than thread, so I wasn't sure if that was the official title or just what people here are calling it.

 

[Timewalker]

I wonder how much nuDune BS will be in it, given that KJA, BH, and some other Herbert family members have executive producer titles. 'Cause they marketed Paul of Dune as the "direct" sequel to Dune, and it's nothing but organic bovine waste.

 

[Marc]

The average person will now know that Dune is based on a book, perhaps even a series of books. But not all the titles. So with the second movie being called Dune 2, it's easier to just go with Dune 3 instead of Messiah. It's going to confuse people I think.

Dune 3: Messiah anyone?

 

[JD]

I wonder how much nuDune BS will be in it, given that KJA, BH, and some other Herbert family members have executive producer titles. 'Cause they marketed Paul of Dune as the "direct" sequel to Dune, and it's nothing but organic bovine waste.

They didn't seem to put any in Part 1, so I don't see why this one would be any different. I haven't seen Part 2 yet, so I don't know if they added anything in there.
It's worth keeping in mind that movies like this have a shit ton of EPs, and a lot of them are just kind of an honorary thing. Just look at the Marvel movies, a lot of them include Stan Lee as an EP, but as far as I know he didn't have anything to do with them.

 

[DigificWriter]

So is the official title Dune Part 3?

Yes.

 

[FlyingWave]

dune part 3 is such a bad title.

 

[Set Harth]

It'll always be Dune Messiah to me.

 

[FPAlpha]

dune part 3 is such a bad title.

Well, it's easy to remember and place for the general audience. Pure Dune fans as the only audience wouldn't obviously have been enough to even get the first film made so i tend to give projects like these a pass on many things that deviate from the original source to make it more mass capable ( up to a certain red line, which these movies haven't crossed by a mile despite what some here may think).

 

[DigificWriter]

dune part 3 is such a bad title.

How?

Why?

It creates Franchise symmetry and justifies the decision to split the story of the original Dune novel across two movies.

 

[Mage]

dune part 3 is such a bad title.

Well, it's easy to remember and place for the general audience. Pure Dune fans as the only audience wouldn't obviously have been enough to even get the first film made so i tend to give projects like these a pass on many things that deviate from the original source to make it more mass capable ( up to a certain red line, which these movies haven't crossed by a mile despite what some here may think).

How?

Why?

It creates Franchise symmetry and justifies the decision to split the story of the original Dune novel across two movies.

I mentioned this before.... The general movie going audience MAY have heard about the novels. That's it. For them, it's Dune. Done and done. The interwebz needs to understand Hollywood is NOT for them. So.... Dune 1, Dune 2 and Dune 3 works for the general audience.

Deal
With
It.

Next topic please.

 

[fireproof78]

I mentioned this before.... The general movie going audience MAY have heard about the novels. That's it. For them, it's Dune. Done and done. The interwebz needs to understand Hollywood is NOT for them. So.... Dune 1, Dune 2 and Dune 3 works for the general audience.

Deal
With
It.

Next topic please.

What's in a name? If I put it as Dune Part 3 instead of Dune:Messiah is the content lesser?

 

[David cgc]

Why not pull the opposite of what they did with Part 1? Solicit it as Part 3 in the ads, but the actual title screen in the movie is "Dune: Messiah." Once you're watching the movie, it's too late to be confused.

 

[FlyingWave]

Well, it's easy to remember and place for the general audience. Pure Dune fans as the only audience wouldn't obviously have been enough to even get the first film made so i tend to give projects like these a pass on many things that deviate from the original source to make it more mass capable ( up to a certain red line, which these movies haven't crossed by a mile despite what some here may think).

How?

Why?

It creates Franchise symmetry and justifies the decision to split the story of the original Dune novel across two movies.

I mentioned this before.... The general movie going audience MAY have heard about the novels. That's it. For them, it's Dune. Done and done. The interwebz needs to understand Hollywood is NOT for them. So.... Dune 1, Dune 2 and Dune 3 works for the general audience.

Deal
With
It.

Next topic please.

without going into detail i think they want to change it much more then they already changed the first 2 movies. i fear they will do that because to me at least the second book feels much more creepy uncanny kind of sci fi with a touch of horror here and there and i think they dont want that. they want something which fits hollywood blockbusters more. so thats why they dont want to use the book name. for me dune part 3 is misleading. the second book is a sequel that take place after some time. the name dune part 3 is misleading , it makes it sound like part 3 of the first dune when its not. dune messiah is a very different book then the first. having "part 3" on it is misleading

 

[Mage]

without going into detail i think they want to change it much more then they already changed the first 2 movies. i fear they will do that because to me at least the second book feels much more creepy uncanny kind of sci fi with a touch of horror here and there and i think they dont want that. they want something which fits hollywood blockbusters more. so thats why they dont want to use the book name. for me dune part 3 is misleading. the second book is a sequel that take place after some time. the name dune part 3 is misleading , it makes it sound like part 3 of the first dune when its not. dune messiah is a very different book then the first. having "part 3" on it is misleading

I believe we may have different points of view on how we see these adaptions. To me, they are interpretations/inspirations. They do NOT need to be exact replica's of the novels. Those that wish that, may very well be disappointed.
For me, it is almost impossible to literally copy novels like Dune, LOTR, Harry Potter and such into movies that follow the narrative beat by beat. So creative license is required. So, in the stories based on the novels in the Dune saga, the third movie is NOT Messiah. It is simply Dune 3. Based and inspired by the novel but not an duplicate.

Now, I know I am putting myself in a tricky corner because why would I not say the same about Return Of The King, or The Halfblood Prince? Quite simply, if the third movie was called Dune Messiah I personally would also be ok with that. I just don't see any real issue in calling it Dune 3.

 

[FPAlpha]

without going into detail i think they want to change it much more then they already changed the first 2 movies. i fear they will do that because to me at least the second book feels much more creepy uncanny kind of sci fi with a touch of horror here and there and i think they dont want that. they want something which fits hollywood blockbusters more. so thats why they dont want to use the book name. for me dune part 3 is misleading. the second book is a sequel that take place after some time. the name dune part 3 is misleading , it makes it sound like part 3 of the first dune when its not. dune messiah is a very different book then the first. having "part 3" on it is misleading

Will the name of the movie take away anything of its story?

According to Herbert he also felt he needed to write Messiah to remind people ( again) what the first book was about, i.e. one of its central themes because some people still saw Paul as a hero much like the movie audience does now judging by the reaction videos i saw ( only a tiny minority actually went "Wait a minute - Paul becoming this leader of fanatics can't be good").

So in a way, at least for me, the third book completes Paul's story and if it weren't too big of a single book it might as well have been incorporated into Dune proper as a single Paul Muad'dib book.

In the end it's an extremely minor thing to even discuss this to be honest.

 

[The Wormhole]

without going into detail i think they want to change it much more then they already changed the first 2 movies. i fear they will do that because to me at least the second book feels much more creepy uncanny kind of sci fi with a touch of horror here and there and i think they dont want that. they want something which fits hollywood blockbusters more. so thats why they dont want to use the book name. for me dune part 3 is misleading. the second book is a sequel that take place after some time. the name dune part 3 is misleading , it makes it sound like part 3 of the first dune when its not. dune messiah is a very different book then the first. having "part 3" on it is misleading

So, am I to understand you think things are misleading here?

 

[Nerys Myk]

Dune III: Messiah

Solved it.

 

[Sketcher]

Just call it Dune: House Atreides to really rile up the fanbase.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Just call it Dune: House Atreides to really rile up the fanbase.

Dune III: House Atreides: Messiah for good measure!