“Abomination” is said toward Paul, not the fetus.
My sandworm questions are how do they stop it to get off and have a whole palanquin attached to it!
A desire to make Dune 3 where she makes her appearance.
They also eliminated (or postponed) Paul explaining to Chani that his marriage to Irulan was one of convenience. Also IIRC in the book there was no war with the Great Houses at the end.
No, Alia is the abomination. A reverend mother from fetus on, with the total historical memory of all the reverend mothers. She ends up going nuts in the later books.
Someone rides it until it gets too tired to kill them.
Yeah, from the books I recall that an exhausted worm will lie motionless on the surface for a while.
In the book and the prior adaptations it is clearly and explicitly addressed at Alia, in which context it has a specific meaning. But in the film, Dune Part 2, the word is muttered as a reaction when Paul uses Boss Level Voice to shut down Mohiam. So it comes off sounding to someone unfamiliar with the story as just that the BG think it abominable that this rogue bloodline has acquired such powers, as opposed to the more specific book meaning.
There wasn’t in the first book, but the second book takes place after the Fremen Galactic Jihad. It always came off as a bit of a retcon to me. The first book ends with Paul preventing a war by threatening the spice and marrying Irulan, and then for reasons unexplained, a war happens anyway.
It’s one reason why I think Dune should have been a standalone book.
Yes, I have never read the books, all I know is just what was in the films. In Part Two, when Paul uses the Voice on Charlotte Rampling’s reverend mother, she says “Abomination.”
IMO, this was pretty clearly implied and understood by Paul saying to Chani (paraphrased) “no matter what happens, you’re the only one I love” immediately before proposing to the princess.
True, but apparently (in the movie) Chani didn’t get the hint.
Or she got it but she does not like it at all that he is doing so, and feels she should not have been expected to just go along, which would be consistent with the characterization in the film. After all the talk about wanting the ways of equality and of Fremen, here he is reverting to the ways of Feudal Lords and the plots of his mother’s kind – and right after, what to her looks like using the Fremen to wage his war not theirs. So yeah, she sees her fears confirmed that Paul and Stilgar are going to be doing all the things she objected to.
You control a worm by using the hooks to open a gap between ring segments, exposing the soft tissue. The worm acts to keep the gap above ground and away from the abrasive sand. By adjusting the hooks and changing the gaps, you can steer it. Once you remove the hooks and allow it to close up the gaps, the worm is more interested in getting away from the surface than in attacking you.
I haven’t read the book, but I think her reaction in the movie is consistent with her lover telling her that he’s going to marry someone else, even if it’s only political.
Of course, it’s also consistent with her not understanding that, but her character seemed to understand
In the book, Chani understood the why of it all but she was (understandably) not happy about it.
That was exactly the impression I took away from the movie. But it wasn’t verbalized so other interpretations can be made.
That’s correct, and straight from the novel. When we first encounter Alia after the time jump, she’s described: “Behind Harah came Alia, a girl-child of about two years.” And that’s the day Paul rides the sandworm & later reunites with Gurney, so it’s not a long time between that and the end of the novel.
And in the Appendices, which AFAIK were also written by Frank Herbert as part of the novel, she is described as being born in 10,191, and the Baron dies in 10,193.
Interestingly, in the Appendix, (spoiler for Children of Dune) Lady Jessica is given a death date of 10,256. Alia’s date is open-ended, implying she’s “still alive” at the time the appendix was written - suppposedly it’s an “in-universe” account - “Selected Excerpts of the Noble Houses”. But of course Alia dies in Children of Dune, while Jessica is still alive at the end of the book.
If she was born near the beginning of 10,191, and wasted the Baron around the end of 10,193, why could she not have been “about four years old” at the time, like it says in the novel?
Wouldn’t that make her “about” three years old?
If she was born in 10,191, near the end of that same year she would be “about one year old”, and so on.
Also, where did those official dates come from? Could there have been a typo? Finally, the “four years old” is the Emperor’s impression, not that he seems the type not to be able to tell the difference between a three-year-old and a four-year-old.
ETA I do see in Appendix IV the dates 10,191 and 10,193. Also, Alia was born around the end of the year, not the beginning, which supports the two-year estimate.