 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| It's not perfect by fabio 06/05/2012, 8:02pm PDT | ||||
 |
 |
|||
But compared to it, the rest of science fantasy is what the rest of regular fantasy is to The Grey Mouser books, a goddamn embarrassment.
Arbit wrote: This didn't bother me much. Seemed like it was just there as an introduction to subtext for conversationally challenged nerds. Its saving grace is the fact that it's not merely an informed attribute. If you took away the inner thoughts describing everything, you would still have meaningful dialog full of subtle veiled threats. - The shields vs projectile vs stabby does not make a lot of sense. First, I don't see how an unshielded knife fighter could possibly win against a shielded one. Shields deflect quick slashes and stabs, obviously, but its also implied that high impact weapons like artillery are useless against a shielded person, so you can't punch a shielded guy either. Spinning around rapidly and windmilling your arms should essentially make you invincible. So how are the Fremen kicking the shit out of shielded Sardaukar, let alone Harkonnen conscripts? Secondly, if shields aren't used in the deep desert because they attract sandworms, why doesn't everyone revert back to guns? At one point Thufir Hawat (the Atreides Mentat Assassin if you don't remember) gets owned instantly by a "slow pellet stunner" - you would think everyone would be carrying one of those after that point, or a least a Glock or something? This probably sounds like sci-fi nerdrage on the level of "but you can't hear any soooound in space" but really, I'm trying to envision these fights in my head and basically it's ending up looking like one side is sitting stock still while the other slowly pushes a knife into their faces. Or the most glaring logic hole: the atomic blast whenever the smallest hand laser hit a shield. You'd think they'd base every weapon around that. Why bother with the massive plot of invasion and sabotage when they could have just had one Harkonnen suicide bomber fire a laser at the palace shield? I think the whole thing was just an allegory for the cold war conflict. Two sides dare not use their strongest weapons lest they annihilate each other so they resort to lower tech proxy wars and guerrilla fighters. That has to be it because otherwise it doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. - I can buy the Bene Gesserit powers being the product of superhuman focus and breeding, but achieving the crazy heights of supersoldierdom exhibited in the book simply through extra hardcore training is a little hard to swallow. It smacks of DBZ power level horseshit, where Sardaukar have trained really hard and have achieved a power level of 3,000 and so can kill 30 normal soldiers, but Fremen have trained extra hard so they get 9,000 and kick the shit out of everyone with near-impunity. I think I'm venturing too far into the realm of the over analyzing sci-fi nerd here, so I'll stop. A similar clumsy allegory of empire in decline. Let's talk about my problems with Dune: everything to do with Paul and the Fremen. Yes, I get that their tribal closeness and upfront way of resolving power struggles are in total contrast to the life of veiled skullduggery and political maneuvering that Paul knew. So why is over half the book taken up by it? You have a much more interesting story of the lingering power struggles within the houses, the Baron, and the Emperor, and you skimp out on it in order to make room for Paul acid trip #358. Whatever happened to Thufir's plot to play Feyd and the Baron off of each other? What was the deal with Count Fenrig? Feyd's daughter? None of it resolved. Speaking of goddamn embarrassments, this got me thinking again of what an amateur hour Dune ripoff Game of Thrones is. You have the offspring of a murdered noble exiled to the desert, shacking up with a feared race of warrior tribesmen, advised by an old knight of their father's, only to discover that they have a magical power that makes them a revered mother and gives them a secret weapon with which to take back their throne. Meanwhile the "good" house lord is killed by the "bad" house lord after being betrayed by a third party military. It's full of speeches that sound clever to dumb people (you can't find a single promotion or summary of the thing without some faux profound quote accompanying it) as it tries to ape the subtext of Dune but it's as painful as going through a Mass Effect dialog wheel. BUT at least the 2nd season focuses on the infighting of nations instead of the desert messiah. Am I the only one who always wonders what could have been if Dune had done the same? |
||||
 |
 |
|||
|
