Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
tldr (tim reilly)
@tldr
Wanted to discuss @dwr.eth take that Paul Atriedes is supposed to be more like a “Darth Vader” than a “Luke” (ie that he followed a darker path of power by pursuing the Messiah prophecy) Disclaimer: I haven’t read the books. But I didn’t experience the movie that way. 1/2
1 reply
1 recast
12 reactions
tldr (tim reilly)
@tldr
I experienced it as Paul seeing with clarity that, although he preferred a more idealistic path (one where he stays authentic to both true love and true speech) he discovers that the only way to achieve the desired outcome is to engage in politics — ie, marital alliance (false love) and rhetoric (false speech) 2/3
3 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
tldr (tim reilly)
@tldr
It’s an interesting case where he would have preferred to be truly moral, but realized that to *achieve* the moral outcome, he had to compromise his morals in appearance (which is perhaps what politics generally requires of good people) I saw it as a complex take on the political hero’s journey. /fin
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
Justin 🎩
@jtb
He chose the successful path that caused the least catastrophe to himself and the things that he cared about but the power he molded for himself is evil and Frank Herbert explicitly tried to make that point. Villeneuve made plot edits to try and hit that home further. TLDR his outcome isn’t moral
1 reply
1 recast
0 reaction
tldr (tim reilly)
@tldr
I don’t see it — curious what your evidence is of V making the point that Paul’s pursuit of power becomes “immoral”?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
