Patreon/SubscribeStar Exclusive Podcast: Ep.43 | Dune Part 2 (VIDEO VERSION)
Added 2024-05-09 15:13:03 +0000 UTCToday, we're finishing up our two-part analysis of Denis Denis Villeneuve's Dune adaptation. This movie ended up having a major impact on me. Thank you for your support!
Comments
I'm late to these, but loving the Dune movie discussions! I am curious if Mike continued with the Dune series after Messiah. It gets into all the stuff about worse possible futures in the Children of Dune and then is really driven home in God Emperor, which is my favorite in the series. It is the strangest and most heady of the original Frank Herbert run, but well worth experiencing.
Brock Thomas Walsh
2024-10-22 17:11:32 +0000 UTCHey there! I just wanted to respond to one thing in particular here. I don't think Frank or anyone else has blamed the audience for the misunderstanding. I would assume his frustration was with himself. And sure, it could be, in part, due to the serialized nature of the story's release. Maybe Herbert came to understand the format the story was being released in was part of the problem. I assume that is the reason he followed it up with Dune Messiah, not to somehow blame or guilt the audience, but to clarify his own intention. As to your point here: "If Frank wanted to write a cautionary tale about messianic figures from the start, then Paul shouldn't have been the protagonist, but rather Stilgar, Chani, or Gurdy. Someone from the outside looking at Paul's change. Everyone is more capable/willing to look at the flaws of others rather than themself." I think that's exactly Villeneuve's conclusion and the reason he wanted to compromise on that POV character by using Chani to be the one who sees this. I'm not sure your FF7 analogy is perfect because I don't think Herbert is saying anything like "Shinra was right" with Dune Messiah. I don't think he's insinuating that the Bene Gesserit, the Harkonnen, or the Emperor would have been better leaders or less oppressive or something. The entire idea that the future Paul chose was less horrible than all the others is, in my opinion, left purposefully vague. We are meant to speculate whether that's actually true, or if he's just justifying the Jihad, or in some ways a little of both. Regardless, though, it's not a story about how Paul is the REAL villain or in some way worse than those who were in power before him. I think it's a story about how someone who had a good moral compass, when pressed for survival and when given godlike powers, is just as capable of becoming like those oppressive powers he was fighting against, justifying mass violence and suffering for similar reasons they would.
Resonant Arc
2024-05-28 17:00:27 +0000 UTCI think the same way this podcast tends to ignore sequel content and decades later interviews that answer or change themes from standalone games/stories; the same should be done for the original 60s Dune novel. Frank Herbert's self-described failure to exemplify the cautionary tale crux of his story falls on him as an author, not the audience. The serialization aspect of 60s dune's release is similar to modern days manga release. The habitual act of following a story every week/month naturally leads the audience to identify with that shows forefront protagonist and plot. I'd imagine that thoughts of the readers when each chapter came out would be, how does Paul gain his revenge against all the different parties that wronged him. They wouldn't be thinking of what are the decades long consequences of Paul coming into power. That's just not how people consume or reflect on serialized content. And as you say in the analysis yourself: between the bene gesserit's plan being one generation away and the harkonnen's taking over the imperium. Paul winning could be the best outcome for the imperium. It would also be safe to assume that most people didn't read Dune from a 3rd perspective of Paul coming in as a messianic figure. You'd read it as a self-semi insert that you were always in Paul's situation, not the people of the firemen or imperium. If Paul who has the power of foresight and immense mathematical calculations/analysis says this is the best outcome, most people would agree. One of the hardest things for people to do is self-reflection/criticism. So people would logically look passed Paul's flaws. If frank wanted to write a cautionary tale about messianic figures from the start, then Paul shouldn't have been the protagonist, but rather stilgar, chani or gurdy. Someone from the outside looking at Paul's change. Eveone is more capable/willing to look at the flaws of others rather than themself. What if a year later after OG FF7 released, the entire same dev team behind FF7 released a sequel, showing Shinra was right and that avalanche doomed humanity to extinction without mako reactors. Now the story is from the perspective of a reactor engineer who can't feed his family anymore. Then you have sakaguchi's son saying in interviewdls that the purpose of OG ff7 was that people follow radical causes without concern for how it will affect the working man. Sakaguchi thought he made that clear in OG ff7 with the ending of red xiii's lineage running in the future green ruins of earth. However sakaguchi saw people thought what cloud did was right and so made this sequel to hammer it home how wrong Cloud and the gang were. Now that's a fine sequel story to tell and there are hints in OG ff7 that it isn't about saving the people, but the "world" as a nebulous whole. However this obviously will clash with interpretation that clear majority of FF7 had playing the game. After saying all that you're still my favorite analysis channel on all of YouTube. Keep up the great Fetching work💪
The best time to go to the dentist is tooth hurty
2024-05-28 12:29:35 +0000 UTC
