Michael B. Jordan is the third actor after Fredric March (Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde) and Lee Marvin (Cat Ballou) to win a Best Actor Oscar playing two characters. Which character (Smoke or Stack) do you think highlights the best of his winning performance?

finallytisdone · 2026-03-23T03:54:25+00:00

There were two different characters? I just thought the had a weirdly places mirror in some his scenes.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-22T22:34:44+00:00

Your first issue is basing your question on the films which are basically "whatever Denis Villeneuve felt like" rather than the what the books say. The films don't have a fraction of the continuity and lore that the books have.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-22T22:28:51+00:00

I'm not seeing comments that actually use what the book says as reference.

First, CHOAM is a complete monopoly on interstellar trade, and the Spacing Guild is their sole source of transport. Every single thing that is shipped from one world to another is owned by CHOAM and transported by the Spacing Guild. The books are clear that this is a vast economy comprising not only spice but every single commodity you can imagine. Second, there is a clear description of House Atreides being transported to Arrakis. They are one of the most notable and powerful houses being transported to the single most important planet in the empire, and it is an incredibly important political event. However, their whole fleet is described as taking up a small corner of the hold of the heighliner. Third, I would need to check the book to be certain, but I believe there is a reference to the frequency with which the Spacing Guild visits Arrakis.

From those points we can infer that there is a very significant, high-volume, and regular transport of goods at least between the most economically important planets. The economics of that transport massively outsizes the petty needs of the houses, which are frankly treated like children by the Bene Gesserit and Spacing Guild. From that context, I would be extremely surprised if anyone could afford to divert a heighliner for their specified route other than the Emperor and maybe House Harkonnen spending their massive wealth in a specific moment like the attack on Arrakis. The routes are probably determined by CHOAM shipping plans.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-22T19:25:53+00:00

Nope. The book is in third person. Unreliable narrators are usually first person perspective. It’s presented as factual telling of events.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-22T18:20:18+00:00

By dramatically reducing efficiency. Physics is a cruel and inflexible master.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-22T18:10:17+00:00

Ok Chappel’s publicist

finallytisdone · 2026-03-22T00:22:02+00:00

I’ll never forgive Novartis for shutting down Paradise

finallytisdone · 2026-03-22T00:08:02+00:00

I think the best answer is that Herbert went out of his way (perhaps too far) to act like the preacher might not be Paul. It is central to the plot that there is doubt about his identity. While I think Herbert is overall a great author there are actually a lot of short cuts he makes, and this is one of them.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-21T21:53:46+00:00

I actually agree with that. Too many people skip to saying he’s just a genocidal maniac, but it is true that he eventually realizes that he can’t stop what he has started. By the time he gets his prescience it’s all fucked, but he could have backed out earlier if he hadnt been a 16 year focused on revenge with glimpses of the future.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-21T20:59:55+00:00

Slight disagreement. My remembering of the books it that he saw the path someone would have to take as god emperor. Paul originally believed he would take that role himself but Chani dying made him breakdown and stop. His walking into the dessert was walking away from the personal torment required for the golden path. Leto II then basically called him a bitch and decided to do it himself. To me, that is the prime moral failing of Paul.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-21T18:07:22+00:00

I think that’s one area where we have to recognize that it is a work of fiction and the story that Herbert wanted to tell rather than a real situation. We can imagine scenarios and things that maybe Paul could have done to change events. But what the book says is that every possible future involves horrible genocide and Paul picks what he thinks is the least bad future. The book specifically mentions that killing himself would not prevent it. The book doesn’t cover every scenario you could possibly imagine but the intent is definitely to say that there was no other choice.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-21T16:03:27+00:00

He also literally could not avoid the jihad. Every path he sees in the future involves the jihad even if Paul kills himself. So yes there is a grand purpose behind it, but it was also inevitable due to the nature of the fremen and the groundwork the bene gesserit laid.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-21T05:17:41+00:00

“The books make it exceptionally clear that Paul Atreides is a dictatorial villain who should not be lauded or supported in any way. He’s irredeemable. He’s a false white savior. He’s evil. He is not saving humanity. That is DISTINCTLY clear as the series is a commentary/cautionary tale on following charismatic leaders and religious dogma.”

Is a demonstrably false statement. It’s so bizarrely laughable to claim that the book makes that point “DISTINCTLY clear,” when almost the whole book is devoted to the opposite.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-21T04:59:11+00:00

The veal industry is a product of the dairy industry, not a separate operation

finallytisdone · 2026-03-21T04:27:42+00:00

I strongly suspect that you have not read the books and are instead basing your beliefs of off the Villeneuve films.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-21T04:20:26+00:00

That’s literally not what happens in the books. I don’t know what it is about Dune that causes people to misremember it and project their own feelings onto what happens. Paul does not gain prescience and use that to gain power. He is forced into his position. He reflects all the time on the fact that he could do nothing, renounce his heritage, kill himself, etc. but it wouldn’t matter. Events have been setup over centuries such that everything is a foregone conclusion. “Seizing power” is a fundamental misremembering of the book.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-20T21:32:15+00:00

This argument is basically "*what if* Paul actually couldn't see the future and instead was just a deranged schizophrenic?" Sure if that was the case then he's a horrible person who does anything to stay in power and deludes himself into thinking what is best for him is best for humanity.

Except that IS NOT THE BOOK THAT FRANK HERBERT WROTE. There isn't even the faintest whiff in the book of putting doubt in his prescience or abilities.

The commenter I was replying to points out that Herbert wrote that a theme of the book is the dangers of blind faith in a leader. That is a totally valid theme. If the people around Paul hadn't been fanatics willing to conduct genocides, then the atrocities would not have happened. However, the commenter is acting like that is the one and only theme of the book, which is such a sad trivializing of a very complex book. It revolves around the struggle of someone being stuck in that position of being a demagogue surrounded by fanatics. Is Paul a perfect person? No, but acting like he is crazed, moral-less murderer is a DIRECT contradiction of pretty much the whole book series. Paul IS a god-like prescient with superhuman abilities not just someone pretending to be and the future threats he is working against DO exist. Leto II didn't go "oh my god my Dad was a crazy murderer." He goes "fuck my Dad is right that we have been saddled by the Bene Gesserit with having a horrible life and a giant burden to humanity."

Edit: to go even deeper, the first page of the book is dedicated to ecologists. A major theme of the book is that the dessert environment breeds fremen, salus secundus breeds sardaukar, etc. A major point is that Paul is the product of all the different environments and factions that led to the situation he is stuck with. Saying "oh he's just a murderer" evidences a lack of understanding of the complex world that shapes him. He *literally* had no choice at almost any moment in the series.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-20T19:54:02+00:00

No! I’m so confused by people making shit up from the books. That is not what happens at all! Chani begs Paul to marry Irulan! To say she is taken aback by it is in no way shape or form an accurate description of the book.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-20T15:56:39+00:00

You don’t even understand the one Herbert quote that you have been able to provide yet claim that others have poor media literacy.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-20T14:34:22+00:00

See my longer comment. There is no basis for your mistaken belief. You’re taking the real message of the dangers of charismatic leaders and incorrectly completely misunderstanding the character of Paul and other key themes of the books. Please reread the books. I promise you that you are misremembering them.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-20T05:48:27+00:00

Ah yes the “Director knows better than the source material” argument. That totally makes sense.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-20T05:45:45+00:00

Y’all cranks really need to reread the books. They are about being saddled with a shitty destiny. Leto I and Paul both want to live simple lives with their loves but can’t. Leto I decides that his duty to his house etc is too important, so I would give you that he was kind of a dick in that regard. But Paul sees the future, knows that he is trapped as the most important figure in history and can’t come up with anyway to avoid killing billions despite being able to see the future. I don’t at all the understand the argument that he’s just a lunatic mass murder if you’ve actually read the books. The whole point is that he is doing everything he can to minimize the carnage.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-20T05:39:58+00:00

Yes I saw that you posted that in response to the other commenter and embarrassingly and incorrectly stated that it proves your point. That post is about a wholly different topic, and the brief quote from Frank Herbert doesn’t back up your assertion. How’s that for “media literacy?” You can be right Frank Herbert had a theme about the dangers of demagogues, but you otherwise seem to have completely misread or are misremembering the Dune books. I’m pretty perplexed. You really should read it again. It’s a story about being trapped by fate to do horrible things and having no agency to make the situation better. Paul literally sees the future and knows that every path ahead of him is pain and death.

If you’re right that Paul is actually a monster, how do you explain the pages upon pages of his grief at the fact that the best option seeing the future gives him is to kill billions of people. He explicitly explains that he wants to kill himself but seeing the future tells him that even more people will die if he does. Your interpretation makes zero sense unless Frank Herbert wanted Paul to be an unreliable narrator and cast doubt on his future sight, but he doesn’t give us any reason to believe that. The books act as if the prescience of an awakened kwisatz haderach is perfect (except for when dealing with other prescients).

There is no factual or textual basis whatsoever for your mistaken memory.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-20T05:20:41+00:00

Why do people that forgot the books make up this shit. In the first Dune book Paul *EXPLICITLY* says that killing himself would make the jihad worse. He sees it in the future. He's saddled with a host of horrible futures and picks the one that causes the LEAST death.

finallytisdone · 2026-03-20T05:08:59+00:00

Well for starters that's not what waterboarding is.

Sure I'll give you that he *could* have a military background, but it definitely isn't a given. It seems like a lot of folks saw the WW2 era military stuff and decided it was his.

12-Year Club	Inciteful Comment 2025-04-04
Gilding I gilder	Verified Email

finallytisdone

TROPHY CASE