34

Many years ago, I remember seeing a film (probably a really naff low-budget SF movie), from which the only line I can remember is an evil dictator saying to a captured baddy, “I see you have a heart plug fitted. We all do eventually”. The dictator then pulled this ‘heart plug’ out, killing the baddy – it was a plug with a loop on it, to allow him to do this easily.

Does anyone know what movie this might have been?

The other question about this, which I couldn’t work out at the time, is why anyone would have something that would make it so easy to be caught and kill you?

  • 1
    This question was previously 'protected' because it attracted four very low quality answers. If you're planning to answer this, please check to make sure that you're adding something of value to the site. – Valorum Jan 13 at 13:58
  • 5
    We don't add tags to solved question. It makes OP look foolish. – Valorum Jan 15 at 20:36
  • See also this new Meta which is meant to be definitive and argues its point quite well. – Jenayah Jan 15 at 20:58
  • <comments deleted> Take it to meta, guys. – Rand al'Thor Jan 15 at 21:10
67

Almost surely you mean David Lynch's version of Dune (1984). The evil dictator would be the Baron Harkonnen. In the film, Harkonnens typically install "heart plugs" on their slaves in order to control them. In the book they use poisons, if I recall correctly.

This also answers your second question: nobody would accept a heart plug voluntarily, but apparently for both Harkonnens and their slaves it is mandatory. I assume they give you no options.

There is a scene (warning: NSFW) where the Baron kills a slave boy by popping out his heart plug, purely out of pleasure. In both the movie and the book, the Baron has sadistic sexual tendencies.

  • 4
    Arghhhh! The painfully bad lengths that movie directors will go to to avoid admitting that their medium doesn't deal well with novel length written works never cease to amaze me. – dmckee Jan 15 '12 at 21:14
  • 5
    From that IMDB link: "Budget: $40,000,000" (in 1984). So, really really not a "low-budget SF movie", (compare $32m for Ghostbusters and $6.2m for The Terminator) although it may well have been naff. – Daniel Roseman Jan 15 '12 at 22:02
  • 5
    @Daniel Roseman: indeed, it wasn't low budget. However, everything else fits, so I bet it's Lynch's Dune the OP is talking about. It isn't naff either, in my opinion; it's just over the top and very confusing if you aren't familiar with the book. And of course, it looks bizarre to modern viewers. – Andres F. Jan 15 '12 at 22:05
  • 3
    @IgbyLargeman Both attributes are relevant to the scene and help illustrate the Baron's character, since he is inflicting pain on a slave boy, and it is implied he derives sexual satisfaction from the act. His homosexuality is a kind of "SF book code" for "perversity" (note: this isn't my view at all), but I guess the emphasis is on sadistic. – Andres F. Jan 16 '12 at 18:44
  • 6
    @dmckee Aaargh, I read many of those books, it's just that I cannot write an elaborate discussion of the portrayal of homosexuality in SF in a comment! I meant nothing by my remark except that Frank Herbert's Baron Harkonnen is meant to be homosexual and sadistic, and that those are noticeable traits of his personality, which is meant to be repulsive. Yes, I'm aware other authors portrait homosexuality in a positive light, but in Dune effeminacy/gayness seems to be code for "depraved". – Andres F. Jan 16 '12 at 20:03

protected by Community Jun 13 at 6:37

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.