There’s time. In the book at the point where the movie ended Rabban was just put back in charge of Arrakis (it’s just a few days days after the Duke was killed). Plus the book doesn’t go into any detail about what Rabban did to the population, just that he was nicknamed “Beast” Rabban.
So since seeing the movie, I started rereading Dune and I’m now at the point where the movie ends. To answer some questions above about the what happens in the book vs the movie:
Jessica does cry once - during her meeting with the Reverend Mother when she realizes having a son instead of a daughter as instructed has doomed Leto. But she’s certainly not the “waterworks at the drop of a hat” shown in the movie.
Feyd-Rautha shows up in the second chapter - which is all exposition. The Baron & Piter discuss what’s led them up to the Atreides taking over Arrakis, and their secret plan with the Emperor to destroy them. The book Baron says more in that chapter than the movie Baron says in the entire movie.
It explicitly states that the Baron’s shield is part of what saved him from the poison - “His shield had been activated, set low but still enough to slow molecular interchange across the field barrier.” And he escapes unharmed, none of this immersing him in motor oil or whatever it was to heal him.
Some differences -
Paul is actually much closer to Gurney than Duncan. He explicitly states that Gurney is his favorite of his father’s men. And Gurney does a lot of singing. Totally understandable they cut that out, but it would have been pretty amusing to have Josh Brolin performing a few songs.
They completely removed the plot where the Harkonnens left a false clue that Jessica was the one who was going to betray Leto. This makes sense, since they de-emphasized Thufir so much, but it does mean they’ll lose an excellent scene in the 2nd movie.
Just to clarify, the first six are the Herbert books, sometimes called the “Dune Saga” or sometimes the “Original Series”. All other books (prequels and sequels) are by other authors (specifically Kevin J. Anderson and Herbert’s son Brian). The two sequel books were based on Frank’s notes collected after his death in 1986.
There is also the guidebook that Herbert wrote, “The Road to Dune”, that you can find in the book Eye, which was a collection of short stories written by Herbert and published in 1985. The other stories were previously published but Road to Dune was written for that collection.
Saw it again over the weekend and liked it even more. This time, I particularly liked the all-too-brief scene set in the Sardaukar training camp where the Baron’s mentat meets with the senior Imperial officer (general?). Having the troops harangued in the rain from a tower in some guttural language while they receive, I guess, a blessing with blood drained from crucified comrades seems a very Sardaukar kinda thing to do.
Oh yeah, the throat singing. Having seen it, what else could the Sardaukar possibly use?
My wife and I saw it over the weekend. Just to add to the data points, she’s never read the book - not really a sci-fi fan - but had no problem following along with the story.
She did however miss the elements that Villeneuve did not explain. She didn’t get the significance of the Bene Gesserit and the Kwisach Haderach, she didn’t understand the import of Paul’s vision of burning bodies, and she didn’t get the Mentats; she thought Thufir was just another of Duke Leto’s advisers. The film didn’t really go into any of that, so it’s not surprising that it went over her head. More significantly, she didn’t realize it was a two-part story; she left the theater thinking, “Wait, is that it?”
I can understand Villeneuve eliding elements like the Missionaria Protectiva or the Mentats, in the interest of streamlining the story (and I think the writers did a good job in conveying the necessary exposition without bogging the movie down with info dumps). But they also didn’t sufficently explain the Sardaukar, I felt. Mrs. SMV thought their significance was that they were the Emperor’s troops, and thus he was siding with the Harkonnens. She didn’t get that they were supposed to be elite, unstoppable warriors and the source of House Corrino’s domination. If they’re just another group of warriors - and the movie showed both Gurney Halleck and Duncan Idaho taking out multiple Sardaukar - then Paul harnessing the Fremen into an army that can easily defeat them loses some of its import. .
I much preferred Villeneuve’s Baron Harkonnen to David Lynch’s. I went back and re-read Dune when I found out this movie was coming out and the biggest surprise to me was realizing how different the book’s Baron is to the 1984 film’s version. He is ambitious, amoral, ruthless and cruel, but he’s not the cartoonishly depraved freak of the Lynch film. More to the point, he’s not stupid; he has clear objectives and a strategy to acheive them. He’s exactly the sort of man to turn on his shield in the presence of an enemy, even a dying one.
Which is why the poison gas scene was so much better than the Lynch film, or even the book. The Baron is saved because he turned on his shield, and lets his suspensors pull him to the ceiling, presumably above the gas. The scene flowed far more organically than the book’s “dying Leto mistakes Pieter DeVries for the Baron”.
One subtle touch I really enjoyed: when Duke Leto is dying, he looks up at the black bull’s head mounted above the banquet table. In medieval Scottish culture, a black bull’s head is a symbol of treachery; one was placed before the 6th Earl of Douglas at a banquet in Edinburgh Castle in 1440, before he and his 12 year old brother were arrested and summarily executed. Villeneuve might not have known of the “Black Dinner”, and had already established the bull-fighting motif, so might have had a different idea in mind with that scene; but when the Atreides first set foot on Arrakis, they were preceded by a piper. I suspect he, or one of the screenwriters, was intentionally referring to the historical incident; especially as the impetus behind the execution of the Douglas brothers was to break the power of a noble house in rivalry with the king; a pretty clear parallel to the Atreides and the Emperor.
I must resepectfully disagree. IIRC Feyd (for reasons I cannot remember) stages an assassination attempt on his Uncle, that Feyd knows will be unsuccessful. This involves hiding a poisoned, shielded needle in the thigh of a 12 year old boy the Baron wants to have sex with. I know this made it into the SyFy miniseries. When Alia becomes Abomination, the Baron appears to her promising to quiet the other personalities is she lets him take control of her body now and then. He specifies “a few moments in the arms of a lover” so she knows what he wants.
Oh, he’s a pedophile and a sadist, yes. But not the cartoonish, over-the-top cat-milker of the Lynch film. He’s much more realistic (unfortunately). And the McMillan portrayal didn’t really convey his intelligence like the Skarsgaard version does.
I haven’t seen the Lynch film in a while but I thought the ‘you have to pet this cat and be bitten by this starving rat’ thing was Piter’s design. IIRC Piter was the proud inventor of “Residual Poison” (for those who don’t know, you only need to administer RP once. The victim must then take the antidote every day or die) and trained on a planet known for producing “twisted mentats”
Did it bother anyone else that his depravity was signaled by his physical unattractiveness?
Stilgar?
Not as much as that his depravity was signaled by his homosexuality.
I completely missed that he’s homosexual. But he’s the only fat person in the movie. And by far the ugliest.
I think his attraction and abuse of the males around him is only in the book. I forget the details, but it is in there.
He is a serial rapist in the book. He rapes his subjects and plans to rape Paul Atreides. And Piter plans to rape Lady Jessica.
The mounted bull’s head is from the book - it’s the head of the bull that killed Leto’s father. That’s why the portrait and the head have to be mounted facing each other. So they didn’t add the head, just Leto looking at it as he dies.
Ah, I misunderstood you - I thought you were referring to the Lynch version.
Yes, I know, and Leto glancing at it might be a reference to his father, or meant to compare the Harkonnens to wild animals, or some other interpretation. But the parallels between the Atreides and the Douglases are striking, enough to make me wonder if Villeneuve knew the story. Wouldn’t be the first time - George R.R Martin knew of the Black Dinner; it inspired his Red Wedding.
The sex slaves, gladiators, other workers are not even “subjects”; they are slaves. The Fremen of Arrakis are also descendants of slaves, which is presumably one of the reasons they love Imperial citizens and especially Harkonnens so much.
Yep, and there’s a whole planet, Gamont, which exports sex slaves.
“I’ll be in my sleeping chambers,” the Baron said. “Bring me that young fellow we bought on Gamont, the one with the lovely eyes. Drug him well. I don’t feel like wrestling.”
The bull is indeed in the book, but I like the Douglas parallel.