33
votes
‘Dune: Part Three’ gets official title, will include sequences shot with IMAX cameras
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Title
- Denis Villeneuve's 'Dune 3' Gets Official Title, Will Be Shot With Imax Cameras
- Authors
- Jazz Tangcay,J. Kim Murphy
- Published
- Jul 8 2025
- Word count
- 613 words
Can someone correct the title? It appears only certain scenes will be IMAXed.
I updated the title, but I have a question: what's significant about shooting with Imax cameras?
IMAX is a proprietary film format that involves massive film, in physical dimensions. When shown with a real imax projector, it can have unparalleled visual fidelity. But, the cost is that the film itself is incredibly expensive, and so is the camera. The camera is also very, very loud, especially notable because digital cameras are, well, silent.
Filming entirely in iMAX is very expensive and difficult as a result. You get less shots because the film is finite and expensive. The actors have to hear the loud flapping of the imax camera. The camera is massive and hard to rig onto things.
I'm curious, what makes them need to be so loud?
It’s a real film camera, and the film is massive compared to 35mm film. That means that a physical strip is being whisked around in the camera to capture 24 distinct frames a second. It’s just physics in the end. There’s also a real shutter going off.
Here’s an example: https://youtu.be/UU3WMfQOjes?si=_rq-OdswJrvE10h-
It’s more that we’re all use to the luxury of digital cameras these days, which are completely silent other than cooling fans.
You need to shoot with imax cameras to get the full screen ratio and resolution of the imax screen. Basically, whenever you see a film in imax and it utilizes the whole screen, they used the special cameras to film that. Also there is a quote in the article that explains its pretty well.
The official title is Dune:MessiahThe official title is Dune:Part Three
(which I know is in the headline but isn't obvious and I can't read )
Article says it was previously though to be Messiah but is now officially Dune: Part Three
See reading is very difficult and in my attempt to save others a click I made it worse. Ty
Dun3
Title should have said "Third Dune movie officially titled 'Dune: Part Three'"
The important thing is I clicked through to the article and read the absolute opposite thing than what was written!
I’m somewhat surprised that they’re making another one. I watched the first two movies, but I’m done. At one time I found Dune somewhat interesting (read the first book and started the second), but it’s an impossibly, hopelessly cruel universe and the new movies with their modern special effects really pound that into you. It’s wallowing in fascism and religious fundamentalism. When you’re not watching literal torture, it’s the next thing to it.
(It was all there in the book, but less of a spectacle than in a movie, and the novelty has worn off. And by all accounts, the books don’t get better.)
I totally respect your opinion, though I feel like you may have actually stopped reading at the worst time, as Messiah...
(mild spoiler/theme)
offers a criticism of despots and religion fundamentalism, and admonishes the reader for being lulled into supporting them over the first book.For what it's worth, I also greatly enjoyed the third book for its faster-paced story, and the fourth book for its deeper philosophy. I certainly won't claim that fascism doesn't play a role, but it's not idealized -- at least not by my reading.
Five and Six were never my favourites. :)
I don’t think they’re saying Dune supports fascism. 1984 certainly doesn’t support fascism, but it’s none-the-less a pretty heavy and depressing world because of fascism.
Yeah, he’s not naive about it, but it seems like that’s the author attempting to have it both ways. After all, he’s criticizing something that he made up to begin with.
I'm only halfway through God Emperor of Dune, but if I'm honest, I'd take geo-isolationist agro-theocratic totalitarianism governed by prophetic long-view utilitarianism. Give me a prescient Atreides, and I'll go canvas the neighborhood for them.
I don't think Frank Herbert was a perfect writer by any stretch, but he did not invent despots and religious fundamentalism. Fiction more often than not needs to depict bad things in order to criticize them.
I might buy that for a historically accurate novel, but Dune is space fantasy. It's drawing on pop-culture historical myths that in turn are very loosely based on real history, but all the world-building is made up.
An example: there's a dilemma where Paul has to choose between leading the Fremen to prophesied interstellar jihad and genocide, or walking away, probably resulting in total defeat. It's a dark version of the power fantasy trope where the chosen hero saves the world. So... he chooses genocide.
Why does it happen? Because spice is uniquely valuable throughout the galaxy. But that's contrived: spice is the MacGuffin for interstellar warfare.
The whole thing is a setup, and the relationship with real-world evils seems too tenuous to count as a critique. Dune lives or dies as entertainment - if you liked it, great, tastes differ, but it's not educational. It's true that fiction requires conflict, but I think Dune overdid the evil.
For more about the historical myths that Dune is drawing on, Bret Devereaux wrote about them in The Fremen Mirage:
(I thought Devereaux wrote a pretty good blog series, so I guess it's true that pop culture can sometimes lead to something educational, indirectly.)
As I said in my prior comment, I'm not defending Herbert's writing as a perfect depiction of these things. What I'm pushing back against is the idea that because it's fiction, and specifically speculative fiction, its exploration of these themes is automatically invalid or worth less. Your original comment came across to me as extremely dismissive in this respect. My point is definitely not that Herbert always handled these themes well -- I think the specifics of how he approached those things is an interesting conversation and one that plenty of people have said a lot of smart, interesting things about, but it's not the one I'm currently trying to have -- but instead that it's possible for science fantasy (and other speculative genres) to handle these themes and for the way it depicts those things to be serving as critique of our world even if the world of the novel differs significantly from reality. The fact that it's a work of science fantasy is completely irrelevant to whether his critique is well-done or apt -- the issues present in Herbert's work are absolutely present in some works that are more historical in nature, and likewise there are probably works of science fantasy that do much better jobs handling the same themes.
I think for a fairly large set of people, Dune (the book series) is as big a deal as LOTR. Obviously as someone who couldn’t manage the second book, this doesn’t include you but look at the numbers
And dune 2
I am excited for this. I saw an interview with Florence Pugh after part 2 came out where she was saying that Villeneuve had told her that part 3 would center Irulan in much the same way that part 2 centered Chani. I think that will give some freshness to the story to go with the amazing visuals we already know he can deliver.