I always imagined it to be like nuclear weapons in the real world. There's a taboo surrounding them, due to their destructive power; they're a viable rung on the escalation ladder, but you should be very careful about using them in case they cause uncontrolled escalation. Nobody sane in the real world would use nuclear power unless they really had to, because retaliation can be ruinous.
That was Herbert's angle, I believe. But perhaps even more fundamentally, armies are generally deployed to protect something worth having, and the attackers are generally attacking because they want to be the ones to have it. Ergo, complete annihilation is not high on the list of acceptable strategies for any sensible combatants. It might be the last choice of the defenders, when all other hope is lost, to at least deny their conquerors the satisfaction of real victory, and at which point no retaliation matters. That's part of Herbert's story, as he remarks on how shockingly savage the Harkonnen attack was compared to the way Houses normally fought. No one wanted to put their enemies' backs to the wall so hard that using the 'Family atomics' would seem necessary. And while Paul never uses his nuclear weapons on anyone's army, he does threaten to destroy the spice, which would be far worse for their society, and his ability to destroy it becomes the foundation of his power, much more than his Fremen army.
Could someone in Dune make a simple nuclear weapon by combining a lasgun and a shield? Yes, and Duncan Idaho did so at one point. According to the book, the output of such interactions was highly variable. It might produce a small explosion that would only kill the people immediately adjacent, or it might be multi-megaton, and apparently no one was certain what variables determined the force of the explosion. As a weapon of terror or last resort, it might have some appeal, but as a weapon of war, none of the major combatants in the books cared for it, and tried to avoid situations where it might happen.
Very similar experiences to you; read it after LOTR a long time ago, super-disappointed at the 1980's version.
They have weapons better than swords; they just also have counter-measures to all of them. Remember - Dune was published in 1965, it's an incredible imaginative setting for that era.
Namely, the genesis of the Orange Catholic Bible and the commandment inside it: Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind. Mentats are the natural consequence.
Warning: It's very atmospheric and slow-paced. If you've seen any other of Tarskovsky's movies you'll know what to expect. But, as I said, I just love it -- I'm more of a fan of inner space than outer space in general, and this movie combines them brilliantly (plus, Natalya Bondarchuk is so damn beautiful).
I grew up in the Apartheid system... bits of District 9 were intensely uncomfortable to watch. It was an absolutely phenomenal film, but... oh God, fuck me, some of it an almost perfect mirror of what the state was really doing back then.
Seconded. Solaris is a superb film, and the George Clooney remake, not bad either.
Again, the book Roadside Picnic is very different, but definitely worth reading.
I'm working on a flux capacitor rt now, be patient
.
Earliest tickets for IMAX in London are now August!
I highly recommend the book, if you enjoy science fiction. The movie is a worthy adaptation but it by necessity eliminates a lot, including some backstop and almost all of the extensive inner dialogue.
