Duncan Idaho is a different type of character to Boromir though. Duncan is completely loyal to the Atreides household and to his Duke. His character is simply written that way. Boromirs sacrifice is stronger because of how his character was written. Dune is also a very different kind of story to LOTR. Much more pessimistic and less hopeful. Tragic ending etc.
Yep, and in the source material Duncan Idaho was not conflicted either. What they're complaining about is not a screenwriting issue, it's a difference in the characters in the original material. That they're complaining about this makes me think neither of them ever read Dune.
Dune is a very different story than LOTR. It is dry (no pun intended) and meant to engage the intellect much more so than the heart. That's probably the central reason why Tolkien read Dune and said, "I dislike Dune with some intensity..." The reason why Dune and LOTR are so often compared, much more so than, for instance, Game of Thrones and LOTR, is that both rest primarily on their thematic strength to drive the narrative, and contain many interwoven layers of themes. However, Dune's themes are nihilistic or pessimistic for the most part, use your choice of word, and LOTR's are full of grace and hope. They intersect at many points, such as in the temptation and dangers of power, but the fundamental message couldn't be more different. The other reason is that for the time their worldbuilding was by far the most original and complex ever written in their genres, and each book has become the most influential in science fiction and fantasy, as well as massively influencing each other's genres. Tolkien seemed to recognize this when he said in the same letter that Herbert was "an author...who is working along the same lines". He almost certainly respected Herbert's careful and elaborate worldbuilding. The end result, though, is you do not get a story that is going to emotionally fulfill you or warm your cold heart. Also, to hear these grown men say "The experience our parents had when seeing LOTR" makes me feel about 1,000 years old. I saw these films in the theatre as a young man. Thanks :)
One of the themes of Dune is about the dangers of unquestioning loyalty to a person or idea, I think Duncan's loyalty to his Duke and House Atreides serves this purpose. Spoiler's ahead: His, albeit in subsequent lives, loyalty conflicts do come up later on in the series as a result of the realization of how the world the Atreides brought is.
1:18 I think this is an unfair comparison, because Duncan Idaho in the movie didn't have enough screen time, there are many and I mean many scenes and events missing from the books that would heavily change peoples view on him... People felt more connected with Boromir because we saw his ups and down, one side portraying him as a great warrior, while on his down side we saw how the ring effected him, that made people feel bad for him, and In the end he had his redemption when fighting till his death for Merry and Pippin. While Duncan simply had a short "big brother" role where he was a honorable warrior throughout the movie... that's all there was to him, which is simply not the Duncan from the books.
I relate with the initial point that lots of films don't have 'soul' - but I also hear some of the criticisms in the comments saying Duncan is just not a good parallel for Boromir. Maybe the problem is much bigger than just an issue with the screen-writing.
Boromir spent half the movie with the group and we "got to know him" while Duncan Idaho was sent away to befriend the fremen and most of the story he wasn't present. Duncan is an important character behind the scenes, laying the groundwork. Paul is quickly thrust into the cruel world and he only has his mother to guide and protect him. Different stories and different dynamics between characters. If you read the book, Duncan's death felt much more impactful because in some ways he felt like a relative of Paul, someone who Paul admired a lot and for such a skillful warrior to go down doing his duty felt very cathartic.
I get the point, but I also don't think Duncan has to be a Boromir 2.0. Yes, Boromir's death was much more emotional, but Duncan simply isn't a conflicted character in the books, so why force him to be that in the movie?
Dune and Lord of the Rings are quite different in terms of theme, and not really a fair companion IMO LOTR is at its heart a fairytale of good v evil, whereas Dune is - most fundamentally - a political drama I liked your content though so you’ve earned a sub!
@@MasterIceyy Yep, I'd say Dune is to ASOIAF, whereas LOTR is to Star Wars Dune & ASOIAF both subvert and critique the traditional hero's journey, whereas Star Wars & LOTR embrace it. They're all good stori
Maybe I am remembering it wrong but duncan idaho doubted jessica’s intention in the books and also we have a similar but stronger arc with thufir hawat which doesn’t happen in the movies.
It's hard to compare any movie with Lord of the rings because they are absolute peak cinema. There is and never will be a movie that comes close to Lord of the Rings. Even howard Shores music is one of the most beautiful pieces of music I have ever heard.
They are fundamentally different stories by writers with a differing world view. The Dune movies aren't perfect, I have some problems with the pacing, but if they would have put the amount of heartfelt moments of lotr that make you care about the characters in dune, it would feel out of place. Because it's a very nihilistic story about free will, power relations, the dangers of following golden boys who turn out to be a maniacs and commit genocide on billions of people. There is literally a line in messiah where paul is like: "You know hitler? He's not bad! Should have killed more people though." While lotr is about friendship, finding your courage to stand up to evil. You shouldn't follow paul like he is frodo, he is way more like sauron.
Paul Atreides isn't the underdog, he's the pinnacle of - borderline eugenistic - selective breeding, heir to a powerful house, host of superhuman abilities. In Dune we're not watching a fight against impossible odds, as we did in LotR. Dune brings you to witness the fulfillment of a prophecy, we're watching the white savior play this role, that was already written for him to play. If you didn't get the same feeling from both works it means you understood them for what they are: two different pieces. One is a fantastic tale of this innate, traditional, moral, bucolic good overcoming the industrious, modern, all consuming evil through immense hardships of regular folk, written by a british philologist that fought WW1. The other is a political commentary on colonization, progress and the ascension of tyrants, written by a conservative journalist during the Cold War. Other than a young male protagonist, large scale conflict, and having a conservative bias at heart, there's little connection between both works. You can find similarities, but they'd be an analogy at best.
I don't agree with him not being the underdog at least during the beggining of the book, the Atreides where isolated in a hostile and unfamiliar world against the might of their Harkonnen enemy as well as the emperor and the Bene Gesserit with the Fremen being a great unknown. They were put in this position precissely because their enemies felt their demise was unescapable. Saying that he was not the underdog because of his mostly latent powers at the beginning of the book feels to me like saying Luke Skywalker was not the underdog in a new hope because he had the strongest force potential.
Yes, Paul is this superhuman, this "white savior". The difference to LoTR is that LoTR is a hero's journey. Dune is the story of a hero falling. Paul is a hero becoming an Anti Hero even not willing to fullfill his fate, the golden path.
Didn't like the dune movies the director sucks he should just stick to cinematography. Dunes story fundamentally is missing this deeper meaning and connection that he is talking about in the video. Dune doesnt really focus on family in terms of substance but in terms of roles, thats the best way to put it. Is that good, better, worse to do? I think it makes it worse which is why its not as popular as lotr or starwars :/
Can't stand the lotr movies, love the Dune movies.......Gandalf the amazing wizard because he lit a pinecone on fire -.- those are just boring movies about walking for me.
dune just isnt that good, the world is empty, it doesnt touch ur soul the same way somthin like LOTR does. The music, relationships, lord of the rings is just so pure
It's not a direct comparison, LOTR and Starwars give you characters you love and root for where as Dune isn't trying to do that
Duncan Idaho is a different type of character to Boromir though. Duncan is completely loyal to the Atreides household and to his Duke. His character is simply written that way. Boromirs sacrifice is stronger because of how his character was written.
Dune is also a very different kind of story to LOTR. Much more pessimistic and less hopeful. Tragic ending etc.
Yep, and in the source material Duncan Idaho was not conflicted either. What they're complaining about is not a screenwriting issue, it's a difference in the characters in the original material.
That they're complaining about this makes me think neither of them ever read Dune.
Dune is a very different story than LOTR. It is dry (no pun intended) and meant to engage the intellect much more so than the heart. That's probably the central reason why Tolkien read Dune and said, "I dislike Dune with some intensity..."
The reason why Dune and LOTR are so often compared, much more so than, for instance, Game of Thrones and LOTR, is that both rest primarily on their thematic strength to drive the narrative, and contain many interwoven layers of themes.
However, Dune's themes are nihilistic or pessimistic for the most part, use your choice of word, and LOTR's are full of grace and hope. They intersect at many points, such as in the temptation and dangers of power, but the fundamental message couldn't be more different.
The other reason is that for the time their worldbuilding was by far the most original and complex ever written in their genres, and each book has become the most influential in science fiction and fantasy, as well as massively influencing each other's genres. Tolkien seemed to recognize this when he said in the same letter that Herbert was "an author...who is working along the same lines". He almost certainly respected Herbert's careful and elaborate worldbuilding.
The end result, though, is you do not get a story that is going to emotionally fulfill you or warm your cold heart.
Also, to hear these grown men say "The experience our parents had when seeing LOTR" makes me feel about 1,000 years old. I saw these films in the theatre as a young man. Thanks :)
One of the themes of Dune is about the dangers of unquestioning loyalty to a person or idea, I think Duncan's loyalty to his Duke and House Atreides serves this purpose.
Spoiler's ahead:
His, albeit in subsequent lives, loyalty conflicts do come up later on in the series as a result of the realization of how the world the Atreides brought is.
This is like comparing lemons and limes. They're both sour citrus but they serve a different purpose.
nah
1:18 I think this is an unfair comparison, because Duncan Idaho in the movie didn't have enough screen time, there are many and I mean many scenes and events missing from the books that would heavily change peoples view on him...
People felt more connected with Boromir because we saw his ups and down, one side portraying him as a great warrior, while on his down side we saw how the ring effected him, that made people feel bad for him, and In the end he had his redemption when fighting till his death for Merry and Pippin.
While Duncan simply had a short "big brother" role where he was a honorable warrior throughout the movie... that's all there was to him, which is simply not the Duncan from the books.
I relate with the initial point that lots of films don't have 'soul' - but I also hear some of the criticisms in the comments saying Duncan is just not a good parallel for Boromir.
Maybe the problem is much bigger than just an issue with the screen-writing.
Boromir spent half the movie with the group and we "got to know him" while Duncan Idaho was sent away to befriend the fremen and most of the story he wasn't present. Duncan is an important character behind the scenes, laying the groundwork. Paul is quickly thrust into the cruel world and he only has his mother to guide and protect him. Different stories and different dynamics between characters. If you read the book, Duncan's death felt much more impactful because in some ways he felt like a relative of Paul, someone who Paul admired a lot and for such a skillful warrior to go down doing his duty felt very cathartic.
I get the point, but I also don't think Duncan has to be a Boromir 2.0. Yes, Boromir's death was much more emotional, but Duncan simply isn't a conflicted character in the books, so why force him to be that in the movie?
Dune and Lord of the Rings are quite different in terms of theme, and not really a fair companion IMO
LOTR is at its heart a fairytale of good v evil, whereas Dune is - most fundamentally - a political drama
I liked your content though so you’ve earned a sub!
Dune has more in common with ASOIAF than it does LoTR
Dune is for adults, lotr for kids.
@@MasterIceyy Yep, I'd say Dune is to ASOIAF, whereas LOTR is to Star Wars
Dune & ASOIAF both subvert and critique the traditional hero's journey, whereas Star Wars & LOTR embrace it.
They're all good stori
The spacing guild was missing
Maybe I am remembering it wrong but duncan idaho doubted jessica’s intention in the books and also we have a similar but stronger arc with thufir hawat which doesn’t happen in the movies.
Dune is perhaps more of a tragedy and the second introducing some horror, hopefully the third will bring more emotional connection for viewers
It's hard to compare any movie with Lord of the rings because they are absolute peak cinema. There is and never will be a movie that comes close to Lord of the Rings. Even howard Shores music is one of the most beautiful pieces of music I have ever heard.
I'm very confused watching this. Does this mean that neither of you actually watched the earlier Dune movie???
They are fundamentally different stories by writers with a differing world view. The Dune movies aren't perfect, I have some problems with the pacing, but if they would have put the amount of heartfelt moments of lotr that make you care about the characters in dune, it would feel out of place. Because it's a very nihilistic story about free will, power relations, the dangers of following golden boys who turn out to be a maniacs and commit genocide on billions of people. There is literally a line in messiah where paul is like: "You know hitler? He's not bad! Should have killed more people though." While lotr is about friendship, finding your courage to stand up to evil. You shouldn't follow paul like he is frodo, he is way more like sauron.
Paul Atreides isn't the underdog, he's the pinnacle of - borderline eugenistic - selective breeding, heir to a powerful house, host of superhuman abilities. In Dune we're not watching a fight against impossible odds, as we did in LotR. Dune brings you to witness the fulfillment of a prophecy, we're watching the white savior play this role, that was already written for him to play.
If you didn't get the same feeling from both works it means you understood them for what they are: two different pieces.
One is a fantastic tale of this innate, traditional, moral, bucolic good overcoming the industrious, modern, all consuming evil through immense hardships of regular folk, written by a british philologist that fought WW1.
The other is a political commentary on colonization, progress and the ascension of tyrants, written by a conservative journalist during the Cold War.
Other than a young male protagonist, large scale conflict, and having a conservative bias at heart, there's little connection between both works. You can find similarities, but they'd be an analogy at best.
I don't agree with him not being the underdog at least during the beggining of the book, the Atreides where isolated in a hostile and unfamiliar world against the might of their Harkonnen enemy as well as the emperor and the Bene Gesserit with the Fremen being a great unknown. They were put in this position precissely because their enemies felt their demise was unescapable. Saying that he was not the underdog because of his mostly latent powers at the beginning of the book feels to me like saying Luke Skywalker was not the underdog in a new hope because he had the strongest force potential.
Yes, Paul is this superhuman, this "white savior". The difference to LoTR is that LoTR is a hero's journey. Dune is the story of a hero falling. Paul is a hero becoming an Anti Hero even not willing to fullfill his fate, the golden path.
dune was a snoozefest and i dont get why people like it
Didn't like the dune movies the director sucks he should just stick to cinematography. Dunes story fundamentally is missing this deeper meaning and connection that he is talking about in the video. Dune doesnt really focus on family in terms of substance but in terms of roles, thats the best way to put it. Is that good, better, worse to do? I think it makes it worse which is why its not as popular as lotr or starwars :/
Can't stand the lotr movies, love the Dune movies.......Gandalf the amazing wizard because he lit a pinecone on fire -.- those are just boring movies about walking for me.
If Lord of the Rings is 100/100 then Dune is 50/100
I really didnt like the Dune movies
Wierd, misguided comparison
dune just isnt that good, the world is empty, it doesnt touch ur soul the same way somthin like LOTR does. The music, relationships, lord of the rings is just so pure
Empty skull syndrome