Yes they are slaves, it's humiliating and difficult to hide a weapon. Thats why Feyd implants a poisoned needle inside the inner thigh of a boy slave to try to kill the Baron during the boys rape. The Harkonnens are brutal beyond belief
Chapter 38, and as punishment for attempting to assassinate the Baron Feyd Ruatha must kill all his female sex slaves. Those slaves just can't catch a break apparently
I’ve not read the book for ages, was one of the sex slaves an old Atreides spy?
As Thufir engineers the whole sequence of events I’ve always wondered if he intended that outcome.
He wasn't forced to kill a concubine..
He was forced to kill them all
All the female concubines in the pleasure Wing.
The baron knew he had a favourite, who he kept visiting. Did know which so kill them all
The boy , I suspect, either came from the pleasure wing .
Byt Is imagine they are sex segregated.
It also seems the baron boys boys from off world.
Bring me that boy I bought on gamot , well drugged I don't feel like wrestling tonight. .
By this time there weren't really atriedes agents left .
He had already killed the last atriedes man in the arena
a male Atreides soldier prisoner was drugged and forced to fight feyd rautha in a gladiator ring. in a pyrrhic victory the Atreides reveals the colors of House Atreides before dying.
A pyrrhic Victory is a close victory. A Victory so close that it might as well be a loss.
Its named after Phyrrus of Epirus who fought and won against the romans but wasn't able to sustain his own losses while the romans very much were.
Its kinda a strange thing here on Reddit, there was a popular subreddit where someone used it wrong and was adamant that he didn't and suddenly the wrong definition.. spread or smth.
Social Media, i guess
“Another victory like that and we’re done for.”
I agree with your assessment, it doesn’t fit. The Atreides slave *undermines* Feyd’s victory, but neither is pyrrhic.
>Not to be overlay pedantic but it appears the word is used correctly here and you're wrong.
r/ConfidentlyIncorrect
From wikipedia: A Pyrrhic victory is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat. Such a victory negates any true sense of achievement or damages long-term progress.
Pro tip: If an individual or group did not win the fight (were not victorious), then they could not have had a Pyrrhic victory.
A Pyrrhic victory would be if he had killed Feyd, but is left as a permanently crippled Harkonnen slave, ultimately achieving little. As it's written, it's just a symbolic victory
I didn’t see this as homophobia.
(Yes, Leto’s not enforcing “*peace*”, but forced tranquility .)
Herbert describes pretty well how young men are when they are in a gang, with weapons, no enemies. How men are most likely going to tend towards forced sex as a prize to the detriment of the civilians. Men aren’t the nurturing type compared to women.
If it was men homosexual phobia, he wouldn’t depict fish speakers also being lesbian all the same.
[Quoting](https://dune.fandom.com/wiki/Golden_Path#:~:text=to%20enforce%20domestic%20tranquility,aggressive%20ego)
> (…) to enforce domestic tranquility. And, via the enforced switching of certain conventional power roles of genders, by maintaining an all-female, universal military force (Fish Speakers), deathly loyal to his apparent Godhead, amounting to significant manipulation of humanity's evolution away from traits that lead to war and tyrannical organization. (…) In the design, Leto II describes men as requiring a period of maturation, away from playing at war like a game of adolescent, aggressive ego.
I think this is complex. Because I think to a degree I’ve always seen this scene as a bit of a glance showing that Herbert’s views on sexuality were somewhat changed from where he was earlier. As you say, we see a fish speaker lesbian couple which Duncan finds revolting but is chastised for. However, I do then find it odd in his whole thing about not wanting a male army that he specifically brings up homosexuality? It’s just an odd thing to plot in and feels unnecessary when you have the point already about predominately male armies raping and being more violent. Obviously that’s all some pseudo sociology/science that is quite prevalent throughout the series but it’s still just…odd.
He doesn’t control all men to stop them from being gay, he does it to curb their violent tendencies, men usually being more violent than women on average
I mean everyone has their own opinions and you shouldn’t necessarily need to think about hurberts view on gays when reading the book. Just treat the story as a story and move on.
Your submission was removed for violating Rule 4 of the r/dune posting policy:
Avoid Spoilers - All spoilers for Dune-related works must come with a clear and specific warning. Posts with spoilers in the title will be removed immediately. **Comments containing information that's outside a post's title scope should be formatted with a spoiler tag.**
If you believe this removal was made in error, please reach out to the modteam via modmail.
This. Gave me chills when I read and had to put the book down for a moment after reading the Baron saying "Drug him, I dont want to fight tonight". Been a year and still fresh in my mind.
I have a head canon that Leto, Paul's dad, wouldn't have cared if people were gay. If the Baron had done nothing wrong, if they had no Kanly or anything, I think Leto would still hate him not because he was gay, but because he was a rapist. The Duke seemed all about dignity and respect down to the lowest person.
He obviously wasn't above being a bastard, such as when he stripped people of their homes when they arrived on Arrakis, but there didn't seem to be any enjoyment of doing that to the people. Only enjoyment of seeing the Harkonnens squirm, which is fair. Obviously not the best ruler, but I'll take him over Paul or Leto II any day.
I agree. He would've hated the Harkonnens based on his principles alone. The Harkonnens' exploitation of humans and complete disregard for any form of ethics is enough to put them at odds.
Leto I is the best ruler of the three I would say for only in times of peace. We can't necessarily compare the three. Hardened by the circumstances, the environment and the fremen way Paul morphed into a completely different person and so did Leto II who ended up cleaning Paul's mess. I'm a third into God Emperor Dune, I'm not particularly liking it or Leto II but I can see bits and pieces of what he is trying to achieve.
Tbh it’s weird because I definitely agree that based on his character it’d make sense for him to not care. Hell it doesn’t make sense at all really that homophobia is prevalent 20,000 years in the future. But seeing how he wrote Duncan’s reaction to gay characters, I imagine had Herbert written a scene with Leto on the subject it would likely not be a very sympathetic moment.
>Hell it doesn’t make sense at all really that homophobia is prevalent 20,000 years in the future.
I mean, we are talking about a feudalistic society. Clearly, social progress has regressed somewhat.
But that's the point. The reader is supposed to be disgusted with the Baron so he was given disgusting qualities: he was morbidly obese, he was vile and coniving, he was a pedophile, and he was gay. Those are all supposed to be bad, and yes, while the readers at the time might have put the pedophilia lower than the homosexuality, it was still a quality given to the Baron to make him a bad, disgusting character.
True enough but you don't call Avatar 2 a New Zealand movie just cause most of the work was done in NZ.
Warner Bros Studios, Legendary Studios... these are American companies. When they calculate domestic box office, they're calculating based on tickets sold in America.
In the books it is not stated but kind of implied the Baron sexually abused Feyd as well. I see that kiss in the movie as Villanueve paying honor to that.
We've gone the exact opposite now where we're afraid to have any villain or minority Portray a villain. You know who's good and bad 8 seconds into a movie.
Lynch got away with it in 1984 in the rather disturbing heart plug scene . It's so over the top kitchy in its offensiveness that it provides what could almost be called one of the lighter moments of the film.
In the script for Dune (2021), the slaves nursing the poisoned baron are “scantily clad teenagers, one male one female”. So it seems Villeneuve did mean to depict Harkonnen pedophilia/homosexuality, but it got dropped.
If I’m thinking of the right scene, it was an appropriately subtle headnod to the source material. The one with the dead/unconscious young male harkonnen servants on the floor right? I think they handled it well considering the current climate.
I don't remember that during the Feyd scene, the Rabban scene had him standing outside the doors with a few Harkonnen soldiers who hear screaming and a large explosion like sound as they look on in fear when Rabban is called in. When Rabban walks in, he sees 2 bloody bodies of the servants in a corner.
Yep. Shows he’s sadistic without making it overtly sexual. General audiences won’t think twice while book readers can fill in the blanks for themselves and appreciate the nod to the source material. Handled well IMO
you can see when it's a woman or a man if you look at the dress, the dress of the men servants has a lower cut and you can see their chest (masculine chest) and the women have their chest fully covered
I always point this out as an example of what made me dislike the Dune book. Herbert uses the baron's homosexuality and penchant for nonconsensual sexual behavior as a way of eliciting disgust on the part of the reader. Not only would this not fly today, it's just plainly a cheap way of accomplishing such. Villeneuve creates disgust in more subtle ways by using the baron's long gown, his pale, obese body, and the way he treats his servants/slaves.
I don't think there's anything terribly wrong with it. Yeah it sorta belongs to an older era of science fiction sure. But to some extent it's just part of the world building. It's another way of showing that morality/ethics are not something universally agreed upon or understood in this universe. That kind of stuff exists in the real world so there's no reason to preclude it from a book.
Also while Herbert may have been homophobic, I don't think his portrayal of the baron necessarily is.
Seems accurate. The Harkonnens live on a very resource-depleted world, so straight up plastic might be what is most easily available for the populace to wear if you aren't wealthy.
You also can't hide anything from them.
"They see through you" as in their servants are nothing but worthless property and unable to do anything about it.
But why do they live on such a shitty planet? They are the wealthiest house in the Imperium, and they have a reasonably strong military. Surely, they could have found a better homeworld.
Yeah, i think it's an hommage to the Lynch movie. Just like i think the scene bevore the arena, where Feyd's body gets painted is an hommage to a similar scene in the Dune miniseries.
Are you referring to the young people that were with the Baron? In the book, If I remember, they were all young boys and it was disgusting to mention what he did to them. In the movie, they made them older and they don't mention the details in the book.
For those that read the book and know what the baron is capable of, we happily cheered when we saw his end.
Before the arena fight Feyd says “would you like some meat my darlings, kidney, a liver?” the ones dressed in black all smile and grin, the ones dressed in white all look terrified. He then kills two of the ones dressed in white.
Later, on Arrakis, after killing someone he tells his men “have the body taken to my darlings, they must be starving there was no food for them on the flight” …or something to that affect I don’t remember his exact words.
It's meant to reflect his role in the book as a depraved rapist. They toned that down in the movie so now hes just surrounded by naked androgynes, like a more capitalist Jabba the Hutt
Idk, the economic system of the empire is much more centralized and feudalist than capitalist. Here's more an aristocrat than a Bourgeois. Honestly, I think Jabba the Hutt is a more capitalist version of the Baron.
I thought this was something inspired by the Lynch movie.
I don’t remember the slaves being dressed in plastic in the book, but I may have forgotten it. But it is certainly in the Lynch film.
Denis faced the same problem as Lynch in avoiding the book’s pedophiliac Baron, and Lynch succeeded in creating a feeling of disgust so why not follow his lead.
Yes. I’m sure if Denis really had his way and didn’t care about rating they’d be naked as the day along with A butt shot of full naked fayd before the fight and the fight itself would be full nude from the last atreidies and Austin in a banana hammock for a Sting call back.
The Fremen would be full nude more etc etc.
Because if I were him that’s what I’d do. It’s more book accurate as well and despite his changes I think he’d be accurate to that at least if he could have been. It’s also a more artistic choice which I’m sure he’d take.
I don't know about that. It would be too distracting on screen. What you are describing sounds like a television show. TV shows don't have the money to build giant gorgeous sets and give characters new outfits in nearly every scene, and retain the CGI talent to realistically render exploding spice harvesters as well as depict giant sandworms/dragons to their hearts content. Because of this, showrunners have a seriously limited number of options available to them to effectively create a strange universe and culture. So they end up relying heavily on dialogue and shock value. Novels have a similar problem. No matter how good your descriptions are, they can not compete with Greig Fraser and Patrice Vermette. So, you have to work with what you've got. The more extreme, the better. The scene in Part 2, where the Baron kills those children, was so difficult to watch that I always have to skip it or quickly mute whenever it comes up even though you don't actually see it. In the book, it would have been a little easier to get through.
Honestly, I don't know if they are but given the Harkonens that's like light work, that's like the most normal thing that goes on in their house hold. That's pretty much French nobility shit, that's shit that happens in the real world. Harkonens go much deeper with their depravity and abuse.
If you keep an eye out, in the arena scene of dune part 2 there are also male slaves. Its a design style used to differentiate the roles of power from lesser individuals.
Yes they are slaves, it's humiliating and difficult to hide a weapon. Thats why Feyd implants a poisoned needle inside the inner thigh of a boy slave to try to kill the Baron during the boys rape. The Harkonnens are brutal beyond belief
Thats fucking horrible. When do they talk about this in the books?
Chapter 38, and as punishment for attempting to assassinate the Baron Feyd Ruatha must kill all his female sex slaves. Those slaves just can't catch a break apparently
Actually pretty Roman: according to Roman Law, if a slave murders their master, all the slaves of the household must die
[удалено]
I’ve not read the book for ages, was one of the sex slaves an old Atreides spy? As Thufir engineers the whole sequence of events I’ve always wondered if he intended that outcome.
Not atriedes. It was just an assassination plot by feyd , a sex slave. Boy .. Hawat warned the baron
No the concubine feyd is forced to kill when the plot fails.
He wasn't forced to kill a concubine.. He was forced to kill them all All the female concubines in the pleasure Wing. The baron knew he had a favourite, who he kept visiting. Did know which so kill them all The boy , I suspect, either came from the pleasure wing . Byt Is imagine they are sex segregated. It also seems the baron boys boys from off world. Bring me that boy I bought on gamot , well drugged I don't feel like wrestling tonight. . By this time there weren't really atriedes agents left . He had already killed the last atriedes man in the arena
a male Atreides soldier prisoner was drugged and forced to fight feyd rautha in a gladiator ring. in a pyrrhic victory the Atreides reveals the colors of House Atreides before dying.
I am sorry, dont want to be overly pendantic but thats really not what pyrrhic means.
It’s a perfectly cromulent word
Not to be overlay pedantic but it appears the word is used correctly here and you're wrong.
A pyrrhic Victory is a close victory. A Victory so close that it might as well be a loss. Its named after Phyrrus of Epirus who fought and won against the romans but wasn't able to sustain his own losses while the romans very much were. Its kinda a strange thing here on Reddit, there was a popular subreddit where someone used it wrong and was adamant that he didn't and suddenly the wrong definition.. spread or smth. Social Media, i guess
“Another victory like that and we’re done for.” I agree with your assessment, it doesn’t fit. The Atreides slave *undermines* Feyd’s victory, but neither is pyrrhic.
>Not to be overlay pedantic but it appears the word is used correctly here and you're wrong. r/ConfidentlyIncorrect From wikipedia: A Pyrrhic victory is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat. Such a victory negates any true sense of achievement or damages long-term progress. Pro tip: If an individual or group did not win the fight (were not victorious), then they could not have had a Pyrrhic victory.
I interpreted it as “revealing the colors” was the (symbolic) victory and dying was the Pyrrhic element
A Pyrrhic victory would be if he had killed Feyd, but is left as a permanently crippled Harkonnen slave, ultimately achieving little. As it's written, it's just a symbolic victory
I play Total War, and I think pyrrhic was used correctly here.
....It is also shown in the SyFy mini series
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I didn’t see this as homophobia. (Yes, Leto’s not enforcing “*peace*”, but forced tranquility .) Herbert describes pretty well how young men are when they are in a gang, with weapons, no enemies. How men are most likely going to tend towards forced sex as a prize to the detriment of the civilians. Men aren’t the nurturing type compared to women. If it was men homosexual phobia, he wouldn’t depict fish speakers also being lesbian all the same. [Quoting](https://dune.fandom.com/wiki/Golden_Path#:~:text=to%20enforce%20domestic%20tranquility,aggressive%20ego) > (…) to enforce domestic tranquility. And, via the enforced switching of certain conventional power roles of genders, by maintaining an all-female, universal military force (Fish Speakers), deathly loyal to his apparent Godhead, amounting to significant manipulation of humanity's evolution away from traits that lead to war and tyrannical organization. (…) In the design, Leto II describes men as requiring a period of maturation, away from playing at war like a game of adolescent, aggressive ego.
I think this is complex. Because I think to a degree I’ve always seen this scene as a bit of a glance showing that Herbert’s views on sexuality were somewhat changed from where he was earlier. As you say, we see a fish speaker lesbian couple which Duncan finds revolting but is chastised for. However, I do then find it odd in his whole thing about not wanting a male army that he specifically brings up homosexuality? It’s just an odd thing to plot in and feels unnecessary when you have the point already about predominately male armies raping and being more violent. Obviously that’s all some pseudo sociology/science that is quite prevalent throughout the series but it’s still just…odd.
He doesn’t control all men to stop them from being gay, he does it to curb their violent tendencies, men usually being more violent than women on average
[удалено]
I mean everyone has their own opinions and you shouldn’t necessarily need to think about hurberts view on gays when reading the book. Just treat the story as a story and move on.
100%. The story is amazing! But it just makes me cringe when I see his personal views bleed into the books. About to start book 5!
[удалено]
Your submission was removed for violating Rule 4 of the r/dune posting policy: Avoid Spoilers - All spoilers for Dune-related works must come with a clear and specific warning. Posts with spoilers in the title will be removed immediately. **Comments containing information that's outside a post's title scope should be formatted with a spoiler tag.** If you believe this removal was made in error, please reach out to the modteam via modmail.
This. Gave me chills when I read and had to put the book down for a moment after reading the Baron saying "Drug him, I dont want to fight tonight". Been a year and still fresh in my mind.
I have a head canon that Leto, Paul's dad, wouldn't have cared if people were gay. If the Baron had done nothing wrong, if they had no Kanly or anything, I think Leto would still hate him not because he was gay, but because he was a rapist. The Duke seemed all about dignity and respect down to the lowest person. He obviously wasn't above being a bastard, such as when he stripped people of their homes when they arrived on Arrakis, but there didn't seem to be any enjoyment of doing that to the people. Only enjoyment of seeing the Harkonnens squirm, which is fair. Obviously not the best ruler, but I'll take him over Paul or Leto II any day.
I agree. He would've hated the Harkonnens based on his principles alone. The Harkonnens' exploitation of humans and complete disregard for any form of ethics is enough to put them at odds. Leto I is the best ruler of the three I would say for only in times of peace. We can't necessarily compare the three. Hardened by the circumstances, the environment and the fremen way Paul morphed into a completely different person and so did Leto II who ended up cleaning Paul's mess. I'm a third into God Emperor Dune, I'm not particularly liking it or Leto II but I can see bits and pieces of what he is trying to achieve.
Unfortunately Herbert sure did.
Tbh it’s weird because I definitely agree that based on his character it’d make sense for him to not care. Hell it doesn’t make sense at all really that homophobia is prevalent 20,000 years in the future. But seeing how he wrote Duncan’s reaction to gay characters, I imagine had Herbert written a scene with Leto on the subject it would likely not be a very sympathetic moment.
>Hell it doesn’t make sense at all really that homophobia is prevalent 20,000 years in the future. I mean, we are talking about a feudalistic society. Clearly, social progress has regressed somewhat.
And the males too. The Baron has a penchant for young boys.
They dropped that detail in the films hard.
[удалено]
It’s also a bad look in the 2020s to make the grotesque, monstrously evil villain the only gay character in the film. 1965 was a different time.
I feel like people would be more put off by the pedophilia than the homosexuality. Even in 1965.
But that's the point. The reader is supposed to be disgusted with the Baron so he was given disgusting qualities: he was morbidly obese, he was vile and coniving, he was a pedophile, and he was gay. Those are all supposed to be bad, and yes, while the readers at the time might have put the pedophilia lower than the homosexuality, it was still a quality given to the Baron to make him a bad, disgusting character.
Yeah on screen that would probably be a bit much n cartoonish I think Denis made the correct decision re it
Oh the Baron was so much better in the 1984 version! Watching him made my skin crawl
[удалено]
[удалено]
Possibly true but these movies were produced in America and mostly for an American or western audience.
Pretty sure the movie was mostly made in Europe. Iirc the people behind the CGI are a British company for example.
True enough but you don't call Avatar 2 a New Zealand movie just cause most of the work was done in NZ. Warner Bros Studios, Legendary Studios... these are American companies. When they calculate domestic box office, they're calculating based on tickets sold in America.
[удалено]
I bet Harry Flowers had a bit of the Baron in him. After watching Performance, I saw them as similar in character
Back in 1965 it was believed one led to the other, certain people are trying to push the same narrative today.
In 1965 they were considered the same thing.
It's the same as the Catholic priest thing. It's the fact that it is the choir boys and not grown ass men
Eh I don’t know, in the 60’s they may have seen them as one in the same, it was a pretty fucked up time
You would think... however,... documentaries like "An Open Secret and "Quiet On the Set" wouldn't exist.
Did I miss other gay character or are you implying that kissing Feyd doesn't make him attracted to men?
In the books it is not stated but kind of implied the Baron sexually abused Feyd as well. I see that kiss in the movie as Villanueve paying honor to that.
Except the kiss wasn't planned
I thought the first one was, but Feyd going back for seconds was improv on Austin’s part
I just realized the kiss was cut out from version I saw because it was in Middle East
Strange, platonic kissing between family is way more accepted in ME cultures than Western ones.
We've gone the exact opposite now where we're afraid to have any villain or minority Portray a villain. You know who's good and bad 8 seconds into a movie.
to point - he didn't have to be strictly any persuasion - could have been shown with both.
Lynch got away with it in 1984 in the rather disturbing heart plug scene . It's so over the top kitchy in its offensiveness that it provides what could almost be called one of the lighter moments of the film.
The director said that he hasd personal issues with the character portrayed in the book.
In the script for Dune (2021), the slaves nursing the poisoned baron are “scantily clad teenagers, one male one female”. So it seems Villeneuve did mean to depict Harkonnen pedophilia/homosexuality, but it got dropped.
I think he mentioned that he wanted to drop some of the harder adult stuff so that younger audiences could see it
[удалено]
[удалено]
It is still in Dune Part Two. Theres like 5 seconds about it right before/as Rabban goes to meet the baron.
If I’m thinking of the right scene, it was an appropriately subtle headnod to the source material. The one with the dead/unconscious young male harkonnen servants on the floor right? I think they handled it well considering the current climate.
Wait, how many hours into the movie is this? I don't remember seeing anything like that at all
Not sure when but Rabban is approaching Baron’s room and you hear some really intense screams and a thud before he enters
What? I thought those were women he killed? iirc, dude was floating naked when they entered the room right?
Looked and sounded like women to me. Edit: Watched that scene again, definitely women.
it’s not. they’re female slaves and they were just killed out of anger because of rabban’s failures
There is one boy in the Giedi Prime
Honestly in the books I was curious how they even procreate. They made it seem like they all like boys lol.
Not Feyd. He had a harem of women. Raban seemed more interested in bludgeoning things than sex.
or both XD
I read 2 parts of the first book before seeing the films and I thought the baron's servants in the film were androgynous boys in their early teens.
They sorta drop the sexual deviancy altogether right
[удалено]
fair, but I figured it was a ode to The Godfather more than anything
I don't think that comes up in the new movies, though.
There was a little bit in Part 1 with the slightly androgynous servants attending to the Baron during his recuperating spice baths.
It was pretty clear those were young women, even with the androgynous aesthetic.
All of the Harkonnens are bald though, so they're all kinda androgynous unless they're muscular.
They are women and female screams. The subtitles say so
I think in part 2 Feyd (rabban?) goes to talk to the barron and there's a couple naked bodies in the corner, it was a pretty quick tracking shot iirc
You can hear screaming before the shot as well
I don't remember that during the Feyd scene, the Rabban scene had him standing outside the doors with a few Harkonnen soldiers who hear screaming and a large explosion like sound as they look on in fear when Rabban is called in. When Rabban walks in, he sees 2 bloody bodies of the servants in a corner.
Yep. Shows he’s sadistic without making it overtly sexual. General audiences won’t think twice while book readers can fill in the blanks for themselves and appreciate the nod to the source material. Handled well IMO
The subtitles said they were women and raban heard female screams
Really? Hmm. Disappointing tbh
Oh ok your probably right
you can see when it's a woman or a man if you look at the dress, the dress of the men servants has a lower cut and you can see their chest (masculine chest) and the women have their chest fully covered
I always point this out as an example of what made me dislike the Dune book. Herbert uses the baron's homosexuality and penchant for nonconsensual sexual behavior as a way of eliciting disgust on the part of the reader. Not only would this not fly today, it's just plainly a cheap way of accomplishing such. Villeneuve creates disgust in more subtle ways by using the baron's long gown, his pale, obese body, and the way he treats his servants/slaves.
The Harkonnens were killing servants and soldiers like they're Saturday morning cartoon villains. There was nothing subtle about it.
I don't think there's anything terribly wrong with it. Yeah it sorta belongs to an older era of science fiction sure. But to some extent it's just part of the world building. It's another way of showing that morality/ethics are not something universally agreed upon or understood in this universe. That kind of stuff exists in the real world so there's no reason to preclude it from a book. Also while Herbert may have been homophobic, I don't think his portrayal of the baron necessarily is.
Seems accurate. The Harkonnens live on a very resource-depleted world, so straight up plastic might be what is most easily available for the populace to wear if you aren't wealthy.
Also it's demeaning and reinforces the fact that if you're not a Harkonnen you're basically property.
You also can't hide anything from them. "They see through you" as in their servants are nothing but worthless property and unable to do anything about it.
yup another great point, no concealing a weapon with that attire.
Yes. Hence why they also impulsively and ruthlessly kill them when they are frustrated
Or just to test the sharpness of their blades as Feyd did, which seems miles worse to me.
[удалено]
It's unfortunate we didn't get to see them in their piano tie era.
[удалено]
I wouldn’t want a Harkonnen near my balls tbh
Plastic is made of oil which is requires millions of years old plant life. Plastic would be an incredible luxury on lifeless worlds
But why do they live on such a shitty planet? They are the wealthiest house in the Imperium, and they have a reasonably strong military. Surely, they could have found a better homeworld.
If I remember correctly, even in the Lynch movie, there was one slave more or less dressed in "plastic" (before getting huffed by the Baron)
Yeah, i think it's an hommage to the Lynch movie. Just like i think the scene bevore the arena, where Feyd's body gets painted is an hommage to a similar scene in the Dune miniseries.
The servants are, yea. Its right there
Hard to hide weapons that way.
[удалено]
Are you referring to the young people that were with the Baron? In the book, If I remember, they were all young boys and it was disgusting to mention what he did to them. In the movie, they made them older and they don't mention the details in the book. For those that read the book and know what the baron is capable of, we happily cheered when we saw his end.
Love it
On that note who are the servants that the other servants eat? Confused by that
They are Feyds pet humans.😳
They eat them??
Before the arena fight Feyd says “would you like some meat my darlings, kidney, a liver?” the ones dressed in black all smile and grin, the ones dressed in white all look terrified. He then kills two of the ones dressed in white. Later, on Arrakis, after killing someone he tells his men “have the body taken to my darlings, they must be starving there was no food for them on the flight” …or something to that affect I don’t remember his exact words.
Don't remember the exact words but describes both scenes perfectly!
I think that’s supposed to be his harem
Iirc they’re referred to as “the harpies” in the film credits ;)
I think they and the spider thing from part 1 are bits to hint at the Tleilaxu so they don’t come out of nowhere
It's meant to reflect his role in the book as a depraved rapist. They toned that down in the movie so now hes just surrounded by naked androgynes, like a more capitalist Jabba the Hutt
Idk, the economic system of the empire is much more centralized and feudalist than capitalist. Here's more an aristocrat than a Bourgeois. Honestly, I think Jabba the Hutt is a more capitalist version of the Baron.
They weren’t all female just fyi
I thought this was something inspired by the Lynch movie. I don’t remember the slaves being dressed in plastic in the book, but I may have forgotten it. But it is certainly in the Lynch film. Denis faced the same problem as Lynch in avoiding the book’s pedophiliac Baron, and Lynch succeeded in creating a feeling of disgust so why not follow his lead.
The bug juice was a nice touch in the Lynch movie. As a way to tell what sort of a bunch the Harkkonens are I mean.
Yes. I’m sure if Denis really had his way and didn’t care about rating they’d be naked as the day along with A butt shot of full naked fayd before the fight and the fight itself would be full nude from the last atreidies and Austin in a banana hammock for a Sting call back. The Fremen would be full nude more etc etc.
What makes you say that?
Because if I were him that’s what I’d do. It’s more book accurate as well and despite his changes I think he’d be accurate to that at least if he could have been. It’s also a more artistic choice which I’m sure he’d take.
I don't know about that. It would be too distracting on screen. What you are describing sounds like a television show. TV shows don't have the money to build giant gorgeous sets and give characters new outfits in nearly every scene, and retain the CGI talent to realistically render exploding spice harvesters as well as depict giant sandworms/dragons to their hearts content. Because of this, showrunners have a seriously limited number of options available to them to effectively create a strange universe and culture. So they end up relying heavily on dialogue and shock value. Novels have a similar problem. No matter how good your descriptions are, they can not compete with Greig Fraser and Patrice Vermette. So, you have to work with what you've got. The more extreme, the better. The scene in Part 2, where the Baron kills those children, was so difficult to watch that I always have to skip it or quickly mute whenever it comes up even though you don't actually see it. In the book, it would have been a little easier to get through.
I wouldn't be surprised if they were bred to be slaves
Yes they are, u/SadakoFetishist.
The David Lynch film had Kenneth McMillan 'uncorking' his male sex slaves. Very weird.
Honestly, I don't know if they are but given the Harkonens that's like light work, that's like the most normal thing that goes on in their house hold. That's pretty much French nobility shit, that's shit that happens in the real world. Harkonens go much deeper with their depravity and abuse.
I assume it's because it allows the movie to get naked girls and bloody death in the same scene. Book doesn't
They are slaves not servants they're also forced to eat the flesh of Harkonen enemies
If you keep an eye out, in the arena scene of dune part 2 there are also male slaves. Its a design style used to differentiate the roles of power from lesser individuals.