Anne Rice - the films

[Mike182]

i saw the film Interview with a Vampire (based on the Vampire Chronicles, Anne Rice) a couple of years ago, started reading the books about 1 year ago, but i never saw the queen of the damned film - until i brought it yesterday (to celebrate VH1 having a big sale!)

although there were a few differences between the film and the book interview with a vampire, it was mostly as expected

the queen of the damned however did not please me, the film lacked so much of what is essential to the story, no mention of Mekare, the other twin , no mention of Armond or Daniel, no Khayman, no evil spirit Amel.... but to top it all off, the film puts Marius as being Lestat's creator! :verymad::verymad::verymad::verymad:

anyone else got any complaints about this film, queen of the damned?

 

[MaddLlama]

It was a horribly awful movie, mostly because instead of just doing QotD, they had to combine it with the book before it, left a whole lot of stuff out, changed a whole lot of things, and made it so far from the book series I don't even know how they could keep the title.

However, I was not a big fan of those two books in the series anyway.

 

[kai]

I havent seen queen of the damned but i loved Interview seen it loads of times,and i have read all the books

 

[Mike182]

It was a horribly awful movie, mostly because instead of just doing QotD, they had to combine it with the book before it, left a whole lot of stuff out, changed a whole lot of things, and made it so far from the book series I don't even know how they could keep the title.

However, I was not a big fan of those two books in the series anyway.

i liked the part in the film where Lestat played the violin for Akasha, but that was in the second book, not queen of the damned

i always find books to be better than films, but this was so far away from the book, it was literally a different story

Maharet is not meant to consume Akasha's power, it's meant to be Mekare! :no:

 

[kai]

i liked the part in the film where Lestat played the violin for Akasha, but that was in the second book, not queen of the damned

i always find books to be better than films, but this was so far away from the book, it was literally a different story

Maharet is not meant to consume Akasha's power, it's meant to be Mekare! :no:

i have heard no good reports of Queen of the damned, how did you like interview, did you like brad pitt and tom cruise i thought they did very well.

 

[Mike182]

i have heard no good reports of Queen of the damned, how did you like interview, did you like brad pitt and tom cruise i thought they did very well.

i liked it, i initially had reservations about Antonio Banderas playing Armond, but he pulled it off very well!

Brad Pitt did a wonderful Louis, and that hair was amazing!!!

 

[MaddLlama]

Yeah, I wasn't quite sure how they went from young french man to middle aged spanish man....but hey, it's hollywood. And, he's hot so I forgive them. *shrug*

 

[Mike182]

Yeah, I wasn't quite sure how they went from young french man to middle aged spanish man....but hey, it's hollywood. And, he's hot so I forgive them. *shrug*

:biglaugh:

 

[Smoke]

It's a good movie, but it's not The Queen of the Damned.

The Queen of the Damned was one of the densest books in the series, with lots of exposition in the dialogue, and a lot of Anne Rice fans disliked it for that reason. One friend of mine described it as "a bunch of vampires sitting around talking about history and philosophy." Maybe that's why I liked it so much.

I can understand why they had to cut the story to make a film adaptation, but by omitting Mekare they completely changed the story. It reminded me of that stupid film version of The Count of Monte Cristo where Dantes and Mercedes end up together.

Still, it had its good points. The boy who played Lestat made a better Lestat than Tom Cruise did, and Aliyah was a good choice to play Akasha. I like the film despite its obvious defects, but I wish somebody would take another shot at it, and stay a lot closer to the book.

 

[Mike182]

It's a good movie, but it's not The Queen of the Damned.

The Queen of the Damned was one of the densest books in the series, with lots of exposition in the dialogue, and a lot of Anne Rice fans disliked it for that reason. One friend of mine described it as "a bunch of vampires sitting around talking about history and philosophy." Maybe that's why I liked it so much.

i have heard similar, but i found the dialogue of the first meeting of the new coven to be fascinating, with the history and philosophy

the other thing that bugged me that Lestat is not supposed to have learnt how to move on the air until his most intimate moments with Akasha, but in the film, he can do these great journeys before her.... i know they made up for the intimicy with the bath scene, but that's not the point

i found the book to be amazing, because it built up the appearance of Mekare, the different stories of the individuals finally converging into one, after crossing over at verious points.

i was mostly upset at not seeing Louis and Gabrielle saving Lestat at the concert, now that did annoy me!

as you can tell, i'm holding a grudge on this...

Still, it had its good points. The boy who played Lestat made a better Lestat than Tom Cruise did, and Aliyah was a good choice to play Akasha. I like the film despite its obvious defects, but I wish somebody would take another shot at it, and stay a lot closer to the book.

agreed!

 

[dawny0826]

i saw the film Interview with a Vampire (based on the Vampire Chronicles, Anne Rice) a couple of years ago, started reading the books about 1 year ago, but i never saw the queen of the damned film - until i brought it yesterday (to celebrate VH1 having a big sale!)

although there were a few differences between the film and the book interview with a vampire, it was mostly as expected

the queen of the damned however did not please me, the film lacked so much of what is essential to the story, no mention of Mekare, the other twin , no mention of Armond or Daniel, no Khayman, no evil spirit Amel.... but to top it all off, the film puts Marius as being Lestat's creator! :verymad::verymad::verymad::verymad:

anyone else got any complaints about this film, queen of the damned?

I forgot who Lestat's creator was...wasn't it Armand?

Anyhoo...I liked Queen of the Damned but I preferred Interview much better. I even preferred Interview as a read better (Blood and Gold is very good as is the MayFair Witches Books).

I think Queen of the Damned has a kick booty soundtrack (I love it!) but Lestat was a blonde, if I'm not mistaken and although I have no problem with Stuart Townsend...I think Tom Cruise did a much better job of capturing the "Lestat" that Anne Rice depicts in her novels.

I also thought Louis and the elders, like Pandora looked dweeby. And they really should have expanded on those characters a bit more. (Pandora was an excellent book as well).

I thought the movie was kind of cheesy. I own it and still watch it from time to time but I don't think Lestat was portrayed as he should have been and I think the movie lacked in proper character development.

 

[Mike182]

I forgot who Lestat's creator was...wasn't it Armand?

Lestat's creater was Magnus, an ancient who burnt himself after creating Lestat

Anyhoo...I liked Queen of the Damned but I preferred Interview much better. I even preferred Interview as a read better (Blood and Gold is very good as is the MayFair Witches Books).

I think Queen of the Damned has a kick booty soundtrack (I love it!) but Lestat was a blonde, if I'm not mistaken and although I have no problem with Stuart Townsend...I think Tom Cruise did a much better job of capturing the "Lestat" that Anne Rice depicts in her novels.

I also thought Louis and the elders, like Pandora looked dweeby. And they really should have expanded on those characters a bit more. (Pandora was an excellent book as well).

i have only read interview, the vampire Lestat, and Queen of the Damned - i need to read the vampire armond and Pandora.

 

[dawny0826]

I honestly didn't know that Lestat's creator was Mangnus. Learned something new.

Pandora was my favorite, next to the Witching Hour. The Witching Hour was pretty intense.

 

[Mike182]

I honestly didn't know that Lestat's creator was Mangnus. Learned something new.

Pandora was my favorite, next to the Witching Hour. The Witching Hour was pretty intense.

i was fascinated by Gabrielle as a character, she should have her own book *pouts*

 

[Smoke]

Pandora was my favorite, next to the Witching Hour. The Witching Hour was pretty intense.

Wooo, and people say I'm dark! The Witching Hour is probably the creepiest book Anne Rice has written. (Of course, I was fascinated.)

I don't think I could pick a favorite. I loved just about everything I've read by her, except that Lasher was kind of a disappointment. I'm afraid I may not like her new work, now that she's returned to the Catholic Church, but I haven't taken a look at it yet.

 

[Mike182]

Wooo, and people say I'm dark! The Witching Hour is probably the creepiest book Anne Rice has written. (Of course, I was fascinated.)

I don't think I could pick a favorite. I loved just about everything I've read by her, except that Lasher was kind of a disappointment. I'm afraid I may not like her new work, now that she's returned to the Catholic Church, but I haven't taken a look at it yet.

i am enjoying her book "christ the lord" - it's a fictional story of Jesus growing up, and it's really interesting! well, i find it interesting

doesn't marius have a book of his own as well? or am i imagining things again

 

[kai]

i am enjoying her book "christ the lord" - it's a fictional story of Jesus growing up, and it's really interesting! well, i find it interesting

doesn't marius have a book of his own as well? or am i imagining things again

yes its blood and gold

 

[Smoke]

i am enjoying her book "christ the lord" - it's a fictional story of Jesus growing up, and it's really interesting! well, i find it interesting

I'm sure she's still got the same talent; I'm just afraid her perspective might bother me. But I'll get to it eventually.

doesn't marius have a book of his own as well? or am i imagining things again

Not that I know of. Armand does, though.

 

[Smoke]

yes its blood and gold

:foot: Spoke too soon. I haven't read Blood and Gold.

 

[Bastet]

i saw the film Interview with a Vampire (based on the Vampire Chronicles, Anne Rice) a couple of years ago, started reading the books about 1 year ago, but i never saw the queen of the damned film - until i brought it yesterday (to celebrate VH1 having a big sale!)

although there were a few differences between the film and the book interview with a vampire, it was mostly as expected

the queen of the damned however did not please me, the film lacked so much of what is essential to the story, no mention of Mekare, the other twin , no mention of Armond or Daniel, no Khayman, no evil spirit Amel.... but to top it all off, the film puts Marius as being Lestat's creator!

anyone else got any complaints about this film, queen of the damned?

I saw both films before I read any of the books, and I enjoyed them. However, I've now read the first 4 books, and pretty much the whole way through Queen of the Damned, I was comparing it to the movie - and the movie lost badly. As MaddLlama said, I'm amazed they were able to use the title in the first place, the movie is really nothing like the book. I know they tried (tried being the operative word), to condense The Vampire Lestat & Queen of the Damned into the one movie. I know that a lot of the plot had to go for that to work...but really, aside from the characters (and I won't even go into what was wrong with the casting of those - half of them they didn't even try to shoot for them looking like Anne Rice's descriptions), there wasn't much of the books left, and what there was, was so mashed up it wasn't the same story. I haven't watched QotD again since finishing the book, and I think it will take a while for me to be able to watch it with any enjoyment again - I have to get my brain into 'it's just fluffy entertainment' mode first.

Yeah, I wasn't quite sure how they went from young french man to middle aged spanish man....but hey, it's hollywood.

Well I lied when I said I wasn't going to go into all the miscasting. As magnetic as Antonio Banderas was as Armand, he in no way resembled a 16(?) year old redhead. Not only that, but Marius is supposed to be blonde, Louis brunette, Claudia 5 years old, and from memory a couple of the other firstborn in QotD looked wrong too. :149: Call me fussy, but I find that really annoying!

The boy who played Lestat made a better Lestat than Tom Cruise did...

1. Lestat is blonde, and Tom Cruise was too old to play him (Lestat was something like 18 when he was turned) - but at least he wore a wig.
2. Lestat is blonde, and Stuart Townsend isn't (and didn't even try to be).
3. I think both played the Lestat that was written in the books the movies were based on - remembering that the Lestat in Interview is seen through Louis' eyes, and the Lestat in QotD is more like his true character. I've read that Anne Rice was far happier with Tom Cruise's performance than Stuart Townsend's, though.

...and Aliyah was a good choice to play Akasha.

As hot as I think Aaliyah was (damn, she could move! :faint: ), one thing that she was not, was as pale as porcelain like Akasha is supposed to be. She didn't just start out looking like a marble statue - she stayed that way in the book.

I think Queen of the Damned has a kick booty soundtrack (I love it!)

:yes:

...I think Tom Cruise did a much better job of capturing the "Lestat" that Anne Rice depicts in her novels.

I addressed this above, but I'll say it again. Lestat is portrayed very differently in the two (well, three) books concerned, because of the perspective of the "voice" of the books - Louis in 'Interview', Lestat in 'Lestat', and Lestat and others in 'QotD'. They were always going to be played differently, no matter who did it. I think both captured the essence of the character, I just have problems with their physical appearance.



P.S. Mike ~ it's Armand, with an 'a' - not an 'o'. It may seem like a small thing, but it's really bugging me.