With Dune: Part Three arriving in theaters December 18, 2026, the conversation around adapting Frank Herbert’s complete Dune saga has never been louder.
I mostly enjoyed the first 2 movies. Then I read the books. I've just finished the first 6 - I bought them together as 2 leatherbound trilogies. The first book was pretty good.. but each book gets progressively more "pervy". Yes the overall story is pretty good, but I can't help but feel put off after reading that series.
What do I think? I think you guys spilled thousands of words telling us why we can't trust Sanderson, and now you're promoting his views for the second time in a week. Care to tell us what's changed? Did he win a PR war against this website, or Mr. del Arroz? Did he apologize behind the scenes? Is some kind of back room deal in the offing?
Mr. Trent acknowledged in the previous article that he shouldn't have written about Sanderson without at least referencing his past trustworthiness issues. Will there be a similar excuse here -- and will it be taken seriously this time -- or will you simply delete this comment?
Riiiiight. The day you post an uncritical article about the merits of something related to Starfleet Academy, I'll take it all back.
I think you're too smart for this; you can't "clown nose off" this stuff. You know very well there's a difference between the kinds of articles the authors of this website write about woke people and DEI products, vs. the glowing or simply uncritical pieces you do on other subjects. Your readers know the difference too. So why is Sanderson suddenly getting a pass, after you put all that effort into tearing him down? You're not just reporting on him; you've changed your tone and it's obvious.
Brandon Sanderson is not a completely untalented idiot unlike the SA writers. It's slightly different. He has talent, sold out, and understands storytelling. He's right about this topic. We can talk about things. I haven't changed my tone.
I would say that it's a very liberal hive-mind approach to disregard a good point just because it comes from the "wrong" source.
Please leave the dogmatic purity tests to the twitter mob. Sanderson is correct in this analysis, and considering how large a figure he is in sci-fi fantasy, his opinion does carry weight.
It's not about a "wrong source". Sanderson is the subject, not the source. The article is about his opinion on something, not just about the "something" he has an opinion on. The only people who care what Sanderson thinks of potential Dune movies after the trilogy, are Sanderson fans.
I don't know how long you've been frequenting this website, but up until very recently, they weren't Sanderson fans here. You mention a purity test, but it's not *my* purity test; it's this website's. They spent quite a while crapping on Sanderson for being woke and saying dumb things, but now they've suddenly backed off. Sure, he's the best-selling fantasy author in 20 years; that's not in dispute, but his opinions on the genre only matter if he's acting on them in some way. Casual observations about Dune movies don't count.
Besides, I was under the impression that the writers on Fandom Pulse wanted their opinions to matter in the sci-fi and fantasy space too. I'm just trying to figure out what that opinion is, when it comes to figures like Sanderson. They used to tout their anti-woke bona fides every chance they got, including in attacks on Sanderson. So which is it: is he worth listening to, or not? Is he a reliable cultural observer, or not?
I will agree on some of this. I'm not a Sanderson fan, don't understand his enormous popularity, and don't much care for his politics.
I am also a huge fan of Dune and a general detractor of everything post Dune.
So this article was definitely in a weird place for me too, not just Fandom Pulse.
One defense I'd make is that there are multiple writers for this substack, that might explain a bit of the seeming schizophrenia.
I'd also argue that Sanderson stories get clicks--that's why they run so many (a little too many for me, but not excessively so).
If this author found himself agreeing with Sanderson's take, was he not supposed to present it that way?
I think arguing that because they've taken him to task before means they can't ever present anything he says or does positively is a bad faith position.
I think it's refreshing to change up from the roasting anti whatever approach and acknowledge common ground where it exists. Otherwise, it's just rage baitng grifting and antithetical to the Christian underpinnings of this substack.
I mostly enjoyed the first 2 movies. Then I read the books. I've just finished the first 6 - I bought them together as 2 leatherbound trilogies. The first book was pretty good.. but each book gets progressively more "pervy". Yes the overall story is pretty good, but I can't help but feel put off after reading that series.
What do I think? I think you guys spilled thousands of words telling us why we can't trust Sanderson, and now you're promoting his views for the second time in a week. Care to tell us what's changed? Did he win a PR war against this website, or Mr. del Arroz? Did he apologize behind the scenes? Is some kind of back room deal in the offing?
Mr. Trent acknowledged in the previous article that he shouldn't have written about Sanderson without at least referencing his past trustworthiness issues. Will there be a similar excuse here -- and will it be taken seriously this time -- or will you simply delete this comment?
He's the biggest name in fantasy and this is a fantasy news blog. Next you'll tell us not to report on Starfleet Academy.
Riiiiight. The day you post an uncritical article about the merits of something related to Starfleet Academy, I'll take it all back.
I think you're too smart for this; you can't "clown nose off" this stuff. You know very well there's a difference between the kinds of articles the authors of this website write about woke people and DEI products, vs. the glowing or simply uncritical pieces you do on other subjects. Your readers know the difference too. So why is Sanderson suddenly getting a pass, after you put all that effort into tearing him down? You're not just reporting on him; you've changed your tone and it's obvious.
Brandon Sanderson is not a completely untalented idiot unlike the SA writers. It's slightly different. He has talent, sold out, and understands storytelling. He's right about this topic. We can talk about things. I haven't changed my tone.
I would say that it's a very liberal hive-mind approach to disregard a good point just because it comes from the "wrong" source.
Please leave the dogmatic purity tests to the twitter mob. Sanderson is correct in this analysis, and considering how large a figure he is in sci-fi fantasy, his opinion does carry weight.
It's not about a "wrong source". Sanderson is the subject, not the source. The article is about his opinion on something, not just about the "something" he has an opinion on. The only people who care what Sanderson thinks of potential Dune movies after the trilogy, are Sanderson fans.
I don't know how long you've been frequenting this website, but up until very recently, they weren't Sanderson fans here. You mention a purity test, but it's not *my* purity test; it's this website's. They spent quite a while crapping on Sanderson for being woke and saying dumb things, but now they've suddenly backed off. Sure, he's the best-selling fantasy author in 20 years; that's not in dispute, but his opinions on the genre only matter if he's acting on them in some way. Casual observations about Dune movies don't count.
Besides, I was under the impression that the writers on Fandom Pulse wanted their opinions to matter in the sci-fi and fantasy space too. I'm just trying to figure out what that opinion is, when it comes to figures like Sanderson. They used to tout their anti-woke bona fides every chance they got, including in attacks on Sanderson. So which is it: is he worth listening to, or not? Is he a reliable cultural observer, or not?
I will agree on some of this. I'm not a Sanderson fan, don't understand his enormous popularity, and don't much care for his politics.
I am also a huge fan of Dune and a general detractor of everything post Dune.
So this article was definitely in a weird place for me too, not just Fandom Pulse.
One defense I'd make is that there are multiple writers for this substack, that might explain a bit of the seeming schizophrenia.
I'd also argue that Sanderson stories get clicks--that's why they run so many (a little too many for me, but not excessively so).
If this author found himself agreeing with Sanderson's take, was he not supposed to present it that way?
I think arguing that because they've taken him to task before means they can't ever present anything he says or does positively is a bad faith position.
I think it's refreshing to change up from the roasting anti whatever approach and acknowledge common ground where it exists. Otherwise, it's just rage baitng grifting and antithetical to the Christian underpinnings of this substack.