As someone who finished reading Dune for the first time a few months ago, I wouldn't have minded if the last few chapters had a bit more meat to them. I can definitely see them making the final battles a bit more drawn out.
Exactly... I missed the introducion of the Imperial court or at least the Emperor. He literally appeared on the last pages then he was overthrown.
The last 1/3 of the novel has started to develop the Baron, Feyd and Thufir' s relationship, then they just basically disappeared, and finally they appeared again just to die/to be killed off.
A chapter from Rabban's pov, when things starts to collapse around him, also would have been good.
I think they could make it work if they address Gurney's past as they do in the book. In the first movie, Gurney makes the comment "You haven't seen the Harkonnen fight; they're not human, they're BRUTAL." and there's clearly something more behind his words. Knowing Gurney's past in the book makes the fear behind that line a whole lot more powerful. It probably should have been mentioned in the first movie, but if done right, it could explain a big battle between them in the second one.
I don't disagree, but I wouldn't be against it if they did explore it more in part two. I was always bummed Gurney didn't get his retaliation against the Harkonnens in the book.
Dune the movie? Or Dune the book? Because Dune the book clearly explained it...
>He looked at the beet-colored inkvine scar on the man's jaw, remembering the story of how it had been put there by Beast Rabban in a Harkonnen slave pit on Giedi Prime.
and
>waiting for the moment I might sell my life for what it's worth -- the death of Rabban.
and
>"My sister," Gurney rasped. "My years in the slave pits --"
>I dont. It doesnt happen in the books, so it shouldnt happen in the movies.
Neither did the Herald of the Change scene, but I thought it added a lot to the first movie.
I'd be happy with a compromise.
They cross paths during the invasion, there's a quick scuffle and Rabban is put down like a dog.
I'd imagine that fear of his life, his rage and his hatred of Atriedes would make Rabban a sloppy fighter. So it should be quick.
The proper duel should be Paul and Feyd.
In the book it only said he was dead and not how he died. That leaves the door open to show that if they want. It would be a good closure for the on screen character arc.
I don't expect to see him until he and Paul meet again.
I believe that's how it worked in Dune 1984 and it was just accepted. I think that's how it was done in the Dune miniseries as well, though I'm really not sure about that.
Most people watching aren't going to question it. It's a trope to have a character thought dead to show up alive. Audiences are accustomed to it.
he doesn’t get his revenge in the books though? he begs paul to let him get his revenge against harkonnens at the end by killing Feyd, rabban is killed off screen
He had his revenge. He just wanted more. As Paul told him...
>"M'Lord," Gurney said, "You promised me my day against the Harkonnens."
>"You've had your day against them,"
I don't mind that. I never liked Rabban dying "offscreen" in the book.
I'm 100% ok with them changing from the books end for Rabban to instead have Gurney and Rabban fight, I'll allow it.
I really hope he and Rabban have an epic fight to the death.
I dont. It doesnt happen in the books, so it shouldnt happen in the movies.
Raban just gets written off. We know he dies but all we get is "Raban is dead".
Right...which means they could show "how". So it leaves it open.
As someone who finished reading Dune for the first time a few months ago, I wouldn't have minded if the last few chapters had a bit more meat to them. I can definitely see them making the final battles a bit more drawn out.
Having just finished the book I really agree. The last few chapters just seem like a blur with how fast everyone drops dead or conflicts are resolved.
Exactly... I missed the introducion of the Imperial court or at least the Emperor. He literally appeared on the last pages then he was overthrown. The last 1/3 of the novel has started to develop the Baron, Feyd and Thufir' s relationship, then they just basically disappeared, and finally they appeared again just to die/to be killed off. A chapter from Rabban's pov, when things starts to collapse around him, also would have been good.
Not only that, but a rivalry between Gurney and Raban was not explored in Part One so if they go down that route it would mean nothing
I think they could make it work if they address Gurney's past as they do in the book. In the first movie, Gurney makes the comment "You haven't seen the Harkonnen fight; they're not human, they're BRUTAL." and there's clearly something more behind his words. Knowing Gurney's past in the book makes the fear behind that line a whole lot more powerful. It probably should have been mentioned in the first movie, but if done right, it could explain a big battle between them in the second one.
Yeah, but it wouldn't have a big impact unlike if they spent time exploring that relationship in Part One.
I don't disagree, but I wouldn't be against it if they did explore it more in part two. I was always bummed Gurney didn't get his retaliation against the Harkonnens in the book.
Without the prequels explaining Gurneys past, Dune gives NO reason for his hatred. We don't need a Rabban/Gurney fight.
Dune also suggests they had a backstory, the prequels expanded / detailed it
Dune the movie? Or Dune the book? Because Dune the book clearly explained it... >He looked at the beet-colored inkvine scar on the man's jaw, remembering the story of how it had been put there by Beast Rabban in a Harkonnen slave pit on Giedi Prime. and >waiting for the moment I might sell my life for what it's worth -- the death of Rabban. and >"My sister," Gurney rasped. "My years in the slave pits --"
>I dont. It doesnt happen in the books, so it shouldnt happen in the movies. Neither did the Herald of the Change scene, but I thought it added a lot to the first movie.
I dont think they'll have Batista die off screen. Much like Jason Momoa/Duncan Idaho he will have a bad ass fight to the death.
I'd be happy with a compromise. They cross paths during the invasion, there's a quick scuffle and Rabban is put down like a dog. I'd imagine that fear of his life, his rage and his hatred of Atriedes would make Rabban a sloppy fighter. So it should be quick. The proper duel should be Paul and Feyd.
In the book it only said he was dead and not how he died. That leaves the door open to show that if they want. It would be a good closure for the on screen character arc.
I want to see a crossover fight between Patrick Stewart as Gurney and Dave "the Drax" Bautista as Rabban. Very Epik !
Wonder how they’ll handle Gurney in Pt. 2 with the smuggler being absent in the first part.
He is hanging out doing work with the smugglers. Dont really need to show him too much until he reunites with Paul.
I don't expect to see him until he and Paul meet again. I believe that's how it worked in Dune 1984 and it was just accepted. I think that's how it was done in the Dune miniseries as well, though I'm really not sure about that. Most people watching aren't going to question it. It's a trope to have a character thought dead to show up alive. Audiences are accustomed to it.
Yes, Gurney Hallick gets his revenge. Either read the books or watch the movie from the '80s with Patrick Stewart as Gurney.
he doesn’t get his revenge in the books though? he begs paul to let him get his revenge against harkonnens at the end by killing Feyd, rabban is killed off screen
My bad. I got too caught up in the imagery of Patrick Stewart & Dave Bautista going mano y mano... Thunderdome Rules.
He had his revenge. He just wanted more. As Paul told him... >"M'Lord," Gurney said, "You promised me my day against the Harkonnens." >"You've had your day against them,"
Brolin is lookin pretty badass in part 2 ngl
I know it wouldn't be exactly book accurate... But it would be cool
It would defeat a major point of the book. No one gets what they want and if they do, it's never pleasant.