Although "Dune Messiah" has a large following, it lacks the action sequences, epic stakes, and cinematic scope of the first book.
Instead, it is a philosophical palace intrigue thriller.
Readers of Frank Herbert's Dune series concur that the first novel is an amazing hero's journey that takes place on several planets and features fascinating characters,
exciting action sequences, and well-defined plot and character arcs.
Despite all the chatter that Dune could never be adapted for the big screen, the novel from 1965 has always contained the essential characteristics for a fantastic film.
Both lovers and critics of the latter books exist, but most agree that the tale never quite reaches the dramatic heights of the first book.
The director of Dune, Denis Villeneuve, has stated that he only intends to adapt the next novel, Dune Messiah, because the other volumes get more and more "esoteric."
t is reported that he is almost done writing the script for a possible Dune: Part Three. However, Messiah has several difficulties as well. It's not that Dune Messiah from 1969 is inherently awful.
It is adored by many Herbert fans, particularly those who appreciate philosophical and political debate (its average Amazon review score is just little lower than that of the first book). Simply put, it lacks the blatant drama and doesn't have as strong of a connection to the earlier plot as one might hope.