I want to state my opinion on the books and on the QOTD movie in general. It is quite obvious I'm in love with the Marius and Lestat relationship but it's not the only thing I love. And there are things I can not stand in the film version.
Of course you're free to comment on anything stated in this section too and it will be much appreciated, even though this is not so much about the relationship.
| ME & THE BOOKS | | ME & THE MOVIE | | ON THE ENDING & LESTAT AND MARIUS |
| FILM'S LESTAT & MARIUS SCENES |
| THE FILM SCENES VS. THE BOOKS SCENES |
| CRITISISM ON WARNER BROS'S QOTD FILM F.A.Q |
| VAMPIRES & SEXUALITY |
ME & THE BOOKS:
Other relationships that I love, are Lestat & Louis
(I don't see them as gay or lovers of romantic nature, I feel the books leave the nature very much up to various conclusions),
Lestat & Nicolas
(who are just very close friends in my view, and this article I wrote, tells
that having that view is very valid.) and Lestat & Akasha
(who are lovers extremely clearly, not that romantic either but something twisted.)
They're all very different from the Lestat & Marius relationship
and not even nearly as strong in bond but are still very strong, and each for their own beautiful and fascinating reasons.
I will go in depth with my view on each one of them some day, in this section.
My first touch with the Vampire Chronicles was seeing the movie Interview with the Vampire, back when I was 10-12. (I'm 25 now.)
I fell in love with it and so of course I had to watch the Queen of the Damned, though I think it took couple of years after the DVD was released that I got to see it.
I haven't read all the Vampire Chronicles books from cover to cover yet.
There were times I didn't want to read the books at all because of the horrible fanatic, religious howling coming from the books fans about the changes the QOTD movie makers have done seeing to the books.
Someone even used the words 'this may sound like blasphemy' before admitting to like the idea that Marius is Lestat's maker.
But this person either didn't see clearly, since they said that Marius being so wrapped up with Lestat is wrong. I explain that in the Film: WHy The Changes section.
Some even blame the actors and hate them for things that really aren't their fault and have nothing to do with their acting talents and just can't appreciate anything but the original sources and their own visions.
I admit the Queen of the Damned movie is a disgrace and total insult to the books but it doesn't make it total rubbish
if you just can bring yourself to care enough to try and look into it or at least consider it as a film independently.
In the beginning I was like, Oh my gosh, do I really want to know something that makes its fans that narrow-minded and fanatically obsessed? I hadn't met enough reasonable fans.
By now I'm sometimes like ok, whatever - be stupid. And yet sometimes I feel like yelling 'open your fucking eyes and get over it' or something.
Seriously people - you don't have to like evrything and you can even say it - but do keep your mind and eyes open, don't blame the actors if you don't happen to like what the character is because it's the script writers who wrote it
and the director takes part in it too, and only then is the actors turn to affect the character.
Constructive critisism is another thing but most of the fanatsics are not giving that and are complaining about things that really do not matter and judge before thinking at all.
After I begun to read the books myself I came to see where the hate and bitterness come from - the books' characters and storylines are beautiful - everything, not just Lestat & Marius
(not that I ever thought they'd be the only beautiful and awesome thing.)
And I came to hate the film too. It's a disgrace to Anne's beautiful and brilliant work. BUT I still stand reasonable and appreciating to a degree.
I still look into the changes and cry only about the fuck-ups of the relationships and character personalities and not
about every single little detail
from hair colours to spoken accents - those things really don't matter anyways in this case but especially when there are those truly significant elements slaughtered.
You could read My reacton on the Warner Bros QOTD film F.A.Q to see what I mean.
I critisize, hate and mock them for essential reasons and things, while I do see eye to eye with them in some matters.
Back to the original point: I used to think I'd never end up really reading the books from cover to cover or even close because of the most fanatic fans of them.
But then again it's not the books fault... and I am so into these vampires and stories and she writes exceptionally beautifully that I I'm now reading them up to Blood and Gold.
ME & THE MOVIE:
This film really is more a pain than entertainment.
I've some sort of love-hate thing for this film. I loved, or rather liked, it until I read the books. Because obviously there always were the flaws, like the Lestat/Jesse "love" story that just didn't make sense. But the atmosphere, music and the cast made this ok entertainment even so.
After reading the book, it's a lot worse, since I know it should've been something impressive and totally beautiful but it isn't because they didn't care about the books. So in the end, everyone should just read the books. They're totally worth the money and the time!
The film makers on the commentary track say that even though the film isn't that faithful to the books, they tried to stay in the spirit of the books and that they think they succeeded in it. How in the worls would that be possible? If they don't stay even remotely faithful to the books' characters, relationships, information and events - how COULD they keep the sprit of the books?! That's righ, they can't and they didn't. But then again there were other brainless statements they made too, so we can assume they were either incredibly stupid, or taken too many drinks.
I do find the film entertaining and I don't think it completely sucks. Please read my post to the very end and you'll see.
Someone else said: "...and the Lestat/Jesse relationship, dont get me started, well actually im going to start. I can understand that most people like a good love story, so its good for selling, and it makes things a lot simpler, i guess it works with the script..."
It's not even a good love story - it's not even love to begin with - but it sells because people don't know that before they pay for seeing the crap, and some don't see it even after that.
And one thing it doesn't do, is work with the script. The Lestat&Jesse thing in itself doesn't even work, whereas the rest of the script would've worked perfectly well without the L&J - so without the Lestat&Jesse relationship the script would've wotked perfectly!
I feel, it is stupid to say "it's rubbish because it isn't exactly like the books", because naturally a film can not be that. It could not and it should not, be that.
But just as stupid it is to defend this particular film for anything it does, in the name of limited minutes. Sure, THEY (the film makers) naturally use that excuse, but it miserably false, once people start looking at what exactly the film makers have done.
They call this an adaptation of the books and give an excuse of "limited minutes and information overload" for not adapting the books more accurately. While - they used most of the film with a relationship that is NOT in the books whatsoever. You can't do something that utterly dismissive and excuse it with information over-load when you didn't even try. (Read the original scrip, they really didn't even try.)
And you wish
they just left out stuff. But they totally distorted and dismissed whatever they did take from the books. And why did they do that? Clearly, to aim at the part that isn't in the books - the Lestat&Jesse. The film screams their desperate efforts to pair the two and they in the end do it, regardless of how their storyline doesn't support it at all but the exact opposite.
And just when you thought it couldn'r get worse, you start to really think of how ridiculous, illogic and unrealistic that so-called love story is. No chemistry, no realistic storyline and everything that truly was about love and bond, in the story (and I'm talking purely about the film's story now), is in the very final scene ignored and thrown to garbage box, in order to have their own "lovers" end up together. Who cares about realisticness and logic, when you can do whatever you want?
Whatever could I be refering to with that?! It's a perfect love story with perfect logic, why can't I see it?! Let me just say: HA. HA. HA.
Going in depth with the plotline:
In the film, Lestat was clearly fascinated by Akasha - in the first place when he meets her as a statue and a little even when he meets her in person - and he even more clearly could not live without Marius, obsessing to find him, to get him back. Becoming suicidally depressed and being obviously deeply touched the moment Marius leaps on the stage to protect him from actually being killed.
And naturally, Marius does this because he loves Lestat so much that he would risk his own life to even try and save him. He DID - there was no way he could've with absolute certainty, succeded and survived alive on the stage with all those vampires surrounding them. Not even though he was an ancient, (which however isn't even mentioned in the film.) Without Akasha's appearance - they would've both been killed right there. Unless of course if they flew away, which they were both capable of but the point is that they didn't. So, Marius loved Lestat enough to risk his own life to try and rescue Lestat. And I think it originates from the Bible, the very true saying that there is no greater love than to die in the place of someone else. Which naturally of course equals efforts to save someone by risking your own life.
And I wish to remind you what I already said; Lestat really, really, REALLY wanted Marius back in this film. Starting from calling for him many times even though he never got an answer, to noticing and saving someone he doesn't even know, just to find out if they know Marius, to intending to kill them if they don't know Marius. I could go on, but I think I've made my point.
But as for Jesse - his so-called sweetheart in the final scene, whom he walks with, hand in hand, smiling...
He notices and saves her life only because she mentioned Marius's name and intends to kill her when finds out she doesn't know Marius and thus, had lied about knowing him to save her own sorry ass from her own idiotic undertaking, plus she knew about the man only because she had snooped around his (Lestat's) private journal pages. Who wouldn't hate someone like that, seeing to how much Lestat loves Marius and had missed him for centuries. Next, he insults her with a "Your kind never satisfies my thirst.", and he even look disgusted as he looks at her, which is why he didn't kill her after all.
Some say "she's just a little bit impulsive, not an idiot". Well, I say she's an impulsive idiot. Impulsivness = going to a vampire nightclub alone, as a mortal being, b/c you wanna know more - and idiocy = to do so without anything to defend yourself with.
Some also say "by reading the book I think Lestat was perfectly capable of doing that himself so why the hell hate someone for that?" I don't think Lestat was ever capable of doing that. Let's think about the books for a sec then:
The wolves for example: He left for the hunt alone because there was no one else in his village capable of it and he felt it was his responsibility, so it wasn't even impulsiveness. He had a horse, two good hunting dogs and numerous guns with him. And no fear whatsoever, which feeling was an alien to him. But was fear alien to Jesse? No - she was terrified and uncomfortable in the club and so had to improvise by lying her soul out and then she ran like a little girl and then would've been totally killed if Lestat hadn't saved her beause of her lie. Lestat on his behalf in the wolf hunt did what he came to do - killed the wolves and even though he almost got killed himself, he survived because of his own stanima and bravery.
Lestat in the books being hopelessly reckless, as in for example bracking to Gabrielle, how he would've beaten one of the attacking vampires that were hunting them in the end, even though he probably was more close to dying himself? And Gabrielle said "Monsieur, you are an imp. You're impossible. What did Marius himself say? The damnedest creature." Lestat had Louis and Gabrielle there to help him, plus he thought Marius was somewhere out there nearby, protecting him too. So, of course his attitude was that.
And the Akasha/Enkil statue incident... He sincerely thought nothing would happen and it was potentially true. No one smart thinks 'nothing will happen' if they stick their nose to a vampire night club being human themselves. And Lestat knew he had Marius to save him if needed. Lestat does a lot of things "just to see what happens", he is impulsive, but he is not stupid. Unlike some others.
Back to the film now: When he gets home, he seems somewhat impressed that she had figured out he still had the violin. And probably hated her a bit less because she had stated the journal had touched her. But then, he seems to have forgotten about her. She may have impressed him to a degree but still the basics - her undertakings and attitudes in the first impression, were downright horrible and hate-stirring. As later when Jesse makes her second appearance, he seems surprised and asks her in a sincere and slightly frustrated tone, that why is she following him and what does she want - hence, HE doesn't want anything from her.
And he says with disgusted expression and in annoyed and almost angered tone, that he doesn't have time for her wishes, which wishes by the way were brainless. She argues his decision with a bitchy tone and for some unexplainable reason, he chooses to take her to a flying trip - to hang around with her when there would've been Marius around to spend time with. You know the father-figure whom he had obsessed about to get back for 200 years. But oh yeah, what is that possibility worth after only such a short time as 200 years of desperation and loneliness and yearning for the man. Not much, apparently.
And even if we thought Lestat was mad enough at Marius, not to want to spend a night with him, there were his band and his adoring fans, whom he naturally loved, too. But why bother to spend time with them - he only said earlier, that he had wanted the fans' worship with all his black little heart. So, let us just have him spend his night with this brainless twat, whom he has clearly expressed he hates, and doesn't want around. And the way she spoke to him certainly shouldn't have stirred his interest to any new direction.
After the flying trip, Jesse almost gets killed by falling, which makes Lestat talk beautifully about humanity and mortality. He clearly says he finds Jesse beautiful because she's human. He loves her humanity and thinks humanity is precious. He doesn't even imply in any ways, that he'd love her. Jesse dismisses all this, begging him to let her be with him, even though he never said, sounded or looked like he wanted that. She's begging him to kill in her the only thing he finds beautiful and interesting about her. And she does this in such a shallow way as with drawing the wound on her breast. It's not exactly suggesting the right thing in her caring about his loneliness... And for some unknown reason again, he almost does turn her into a vampire. WHAT THE FUCK?! Way to go! No!!
However he stops just in time, violently pushes her as far from himself as he could, and becomes angry and offended. (Gees, I wonder why!? Could it be her total disrespect for his feelings and values about humanity/mortality!?) And soon enough he clearly intents to kill her again / turn her with anything but loving attitude. So at this point she has only added to the horrible first impression by keeping up the brainless and disrespectve tactic in trying to get to Lestat.
Then in the concert, Jesse brainlessly screams out his name and wants his attention for no reason that I can think of, while Lestat doesn't seem to even remember she exists. And when Marius appears on the stage, Lestat clearly forgets about everything else but Marius and how much fun he's having, kicking the vampire ass with Marius.
With Akasha, he clearly forgot about everyone but Akasha herself, until he saw what Akasha really was like and that he had slaughtered mortals with her. So, when Akasha tells him to kill Jesse and he says "She's nothing to me.", he most certainly really meant that. But why he didn't want to kill her, was most likely because he already had killed so many mortals because of Akasha, though he wasn't on her side.
The only thing Jesse had on her side for Lestat's good books was "it touched me" about his journal, and that she had understood one bit of it on some deeper level. That really
isn't much when looked at the entire picture of what she had said and done all along, which includes numerous major offensive attitudes and actions, and total lack of respect towards him. Plus, Marius had returned and he and Lestat had in the concert made up and were all friends again.
So why the hell is he with Jesse in that hand-in-hand tone in the end? Instead of having killed her off from bothering him, feeling even remotely sad about Akasha's death, and enjoying Marius's company with all his black little heart? And not only does he hang around with J and not do those other things, but he hangs with Jesse, whom he had turned into a vampire - thus killing in her the only thing he ever found beautiful about her. And so there should be no valid reason for him to care about even her exsistance at all at that point.
I think the only valid reason for him to turn her into a vampire would be that he didn't want her to die just because of someone like Akasha, who he clearly didn't exactly love. But then again he obviosuly hated Jesse more than he didn't love Akasha, so... But I think he respected Maharet, who Jesse clearly was important to.
After Akasha's death, he indeed goes to Jesse and even looks up as if making a wish or something; that wish was most likely that he still has time to turn her into a vampire, so he wouldn't have yet another human life on his conscience because of his wayward behavour with Akasha. NOT as if he'd love Jesse. And as said, Maharet probably had an affect on that matter too. But after that act, he would've realistically and logically left Jesse with Maharet and hope beyond hope that she leaves him alone - and been sad about Akasha and how he can no longer be a rockstar but must remain in shadows again, and sought and received comfort in Marius's company.
Because of that:
This film has one of the most self-mocking storylines I've ever had the dispelasure to witness. And the saddest thing is, I'm not even sure if the film makers see it. And, to add the insult to injury; they butchered the borrowed material (from the books) in the name of something they didn't even make work.
Someone said that the day Twilight
was published, was literature's blackest day. I might say the same about this film - only for the from-book-to-film part of film art.
Why not for the whole film art? Because...
...the things I like & improvement suggestions:
This is generally taken, a good film.
X This had a potentially working plot in the parts that were borrowed from Anne Rice's boosk even if they were horribly distorted. (I don't think they would've been without the Lestat&Jesse thing.)
X The actors are all very talented and portray the roles heartfelt and convincingly. It is not their fault the script writers suck and the director also affects how they portray things.
X The atmosphere is ok for a modern vampire film.
X The music is awesome.
X Whereas some scenes are cheesy, some are really good. For cheesy such as the night club scene (inside the club moments), and the scene where Lestat meets the band in the beginning. Also, the beginning's voice-over with Lestat's words is cheesy. The original one they intended was much better. And of course the end is the cheesiest and most horrific of them all. But the really good scenes were all the Lestat's journal entry scenes (except Lestat's birth scene bothered me for several reasons, but it was still ok.) And the entire concert scene kicks ass. Though... I think the way Akasha broke through the stage was ridiculously unoriginal.
This film had several good sides for it and is generally entertaining - if the Lestat&Jesse thing is ignored whatsoever. Sadly, it's impossible to ignore completely. Also, I can not seperate this film from the books. And I'm not even supposed to. It is clear from the DVD's commentary track that we are supposed to think of this as an adaptation of the books.
I have a HUGE love-hate thing for this film. Weighting on hate as I am a huge, passionate fan of The Vampire Chronicles and Anne Rice, and deeply care about quality movies and storylines. I like this film for the above mentioned things. Love comes in with the fact this includes Lestat & Marius, however abused they are, they're still in and have some in-characterness there anyway.
Oh, and I should add that of the changes the film made, what I like and have taken as my own vision too, is Marius as Lestat's maker, in which vision the film makers however miserably failed to make it show how perfectly logic it could be. Of course this would've altered everything and had they even tried to adapt the books, this would've been a crucial change and should not have been done in order to save minutes or any other reason. But they didn't adapt the books anyway, so this was good and could work well if given a better effort. And still - I would've rather seen the actual Lestat & Magnus version.
And I think the way the originally intended to make that relationship into some balance in the whole discipline matter, was respectable even though unnecessary, and they also miserably failed by in the end completely ignoring any physical affection and gentlness from Marius's side.
I also like the way they had Marius appear on the stage in the conceert, to protect Lestat. That's what he would've done in the books too, if he could've, but he was trapped in the ice. And that change made up for some of the bullshit the film had between the pair earlier - not for much, but some.
There was some in-character parts in Lestat's personality and Townsend highlighted and porrayed them very well. Same goes for Marius and Vincent for it. And for Akasha and Aalyah.
Otherwise the film, as an adaptation, sucks big time and not in a good way. If you read the earlier script versions, you may see that almost everything worked - definitely NOT well even in them - but still much more believably than in the actual film. I don't know what the hell happened on the way to make them end up with this extremely ridiculous storyline, when the original scripts had at least some believable moments (that are however always later destroyed by some bs), and they didn't have so many out-of-character lines than the film does.
What would've made the movie perfect in my eyes - not necessarely as an adaptation yet but as a vampire movie in general: If they had left out that torturing Lestat&Jessica pairing and used the minutes they wasted on it, to tell us about Akasha and the Twins, the vampire history, and anyways given more screen time to the Queen. And more of Lestat and Marius because they really are a vital part of the series, their relationship.
The vampire history would've given a whole lot more atmosphere to this even as a general vampire film. Oh, and if they had NOT mixed Magnus and Marius in personality, that was just...wrong. Even though he replaced Magnus as Lestat's maker, doesn't mean he should have anything else in common with the man, because he's nothing like Magnus! By changing Marius's personality that radically, they changed Lestat's personality radically, or rather his attitude towards life and vampirism. This only proves how Lestat and Marius breathe as one. But of course if they cared to make a perfect adaptation, they should leave Magnus as Lestat's maker, which would've amongst other importants, left room for Nicki and Gabrielle, who are also very vital persons for Lestat.
More dislike on the major changed:
But my guts turn inside out because of the indescribably irritating, illogic, unreasonable, nightmarish Lestat&Jesse pairing in the movie.
Seriously, I could watch and read about ALMOST any
other couple rather than them.
You know what is the exception that would make me rather watch Lestat & Jesse instead. *points at the two vampires in the graphics photos*
They are extremely beautiful, deep and psychological father and son and that's ALL they should ever be. The certain other vision is making me sick.
At least Lestat & Jesse is only making me extremely annoyed and angry and I can actually make fun of the ship. It's so stupid.
The Lestat & Marius gay thing is purely offensive seeing to what they originally are meant to be
Anyways... I keep dreaming that some time when I watch the movie again, I could see Lestat finishing Jesse off in the scene where he saves her life to try and find out what she knows about Marius. So what if she's needed later. She's annoying and the pairing is total bullshit with no base or chemistry whatsoever.
Actually, I have now a hate site for the Lestat & Jesse pairing, explaining detailly and very reasoned, why it's so hateble thing:
Never Yours - Lestat & Jesse Anti-fan Site
But I can in the end somehow bear anything they did with the thought that there's nothing I can do about it,
but not the basic fact that they in the first place refused to let Anne involve/write the script though she offered to do that, and told her they'd do whatever they wanted.
It simply turns my stomach every damn time I think about it.
How can anyone say/do that to an author, and to the fans?!?!?!
In my opinion that is the ultimate unforgivable thing.
And the next in the rank would in my opinion be the basic things in what they practically did;
the fucking up of entire relationships; Lestat&Marius, Lestat&Akasha and making up a ridculous own relationship...
LET'S HUNT THEM DOWN!!!
Or, we could just move on and try to go back to things we like about the film.
But the fact is, the script writers and producers should've been sued. Who knows, maybe there is some loop hole in copyright laws for this extreme cases. *Just hopeful, not knowing*
For so long I really thought Stuart Townsend sung himself, at the concert. Untill i found out the voice actually belongs to Jonathan Davis from Korn. His voice really could be Stuart's. It's amazing how that can be. The same thing's with Johnny Depp in the movie Cry Baby. I can't believe it isn't his own voice!
I love Stuart Townsend as Lestat, he showed such a potential to play a true version of Lestat, by highlighting whatever little there was of him in this film's horrible version of him.
And just generally oozing lestatness. So I'm not supporting the entire character version or his performance, I'm just saying I love the few Lestat moments in there and how he did them.
The out-of-characterness of Marius and Lestat individually and in their relationship is painful but I can bear it well enough, and thus they still remain the very reason why
to me this movie is worth watching over and over again. Though, I don't really do that. I only watch the Lestat&Marius scenes and whatever I have to, when making fan videos.
Some of this following would belong to other sections here but I think it's still clearer to keep it in one place because the following is kinda pouncing here and there.
Damn how I wish they'd have ended this movie that way. Marius and Lestat and the other ones staying together / keeping in touch and most perfectly NO Jesse & Lestat!! Woot!!
I've always hated the fact that in this film Lestat seems to leave with Jesse, and Marius go and make David a new vampire companion for himself - it never ever seemed any way realistic or right. Because Lestat would never leave Marius like that and Marius would not make a vampire out of a talamascan.
And the book's ending showed me how very right my feeling had been.
Lestat literally says to Marius "You comfort me. Ah of you. I couldn't even think of leaving you, not for long, anyways."
I was like "YESSS!! I knew it!!" and the Marius firmly forbids Lestat to meddle with Talamasca proved there really is no way in hell he would do that himself.
The film makers were criminally obsessed with that Lestat & Jesse pairing which should really be illegalized for total bullshitness without any chemistry at all.
Even if they didn't want to bring up that ending between Lestat and Marius, it would have been alright but did they have to do it because of a fucking Lestat&Jesse pairing?!
And they really should've had Lestat go to the Talamasca to bug David… with poor Louis having agreed to join his "little adventure", his "rather small, mischievous rule-breaking" - Hell, Louis should've known better than trust and then try to babysit the Brat Prince. But I'm glad he did because his attitude and behavour made the thing all the more entertaining. It was almost like in the cases of breaking-and-entering, where the criminal must have someone with him who doesn't want to go so that they can try to ruin the fun of it for the one wantin to do it. ONLY, in this case, Louis only managed to make it worse for everyone else but Lestat - I cracked up totally at Lestat's comment at Louis seriously said statements about how Marius would be furious and how the cardinal rule is- What? No, wait, the Brat Prince has something to say!: "Louis, you're making it irresistible!"
Omfg, he's HOPELESS. xD
Also this little dialogue between Lestat and Marius has had me laughing all day: The whole discussion from the moment Marius realizes what Lestat's writing to the moment Lestat leaves to take his midnight walk is fun but especially the following bit:
"Then I'll come to you; I'll join all of you. Maybe I'll obey the rules. Some of them, anyways, who knows? What are you going to do, if I don't, by the way, haven't I asked you this before?" He clearly starttled. "You're the damnedest creature!", he whispered. "You make me think of the old story about Alexander the Great. He wept when there was no more worlds to conquer. Will you weep when there's no more rules to break?"
Like, - I can so lively see with my soul's eyes Lestat weeping because there's nothing to disobey, lol. Though, as he commented on that, there always will be.
Anyways - regardless of the way the film ends - I found it amazing and impressive how well this movie after all, shows the strength and closeness of their bond and relationship even with just those few and quick-ish scenes. Or maybe it's Vincent and Stuart who manage to ooze it so well but the truth is I did get the impression they really, really loved each others all along even before I had ever heard anything about how they're supposed to be.
I know it's for one and most significantly the way they look at each others in the moment Marius appears on the stage to protect Lestat. Marius's eyes and being is just so filled with determanate will to make Lestat see he loves him and won't see him get killed without trying to save him and Lestat just so clearly looks like nothing ever had touched his heart more deep and warmly than seeing him there. Seriously the look in his eyes, which he can't even take off of Marius for a long moment. And then of course the way Lestat turns into a completely care-free little devil and happy as ever after that moment, during the battle - though before Marius's appearence he was clearly nervous when the vampires he provoked actually, practically attacked. Also the gentle tone and look in Marius's eyes and voice in the creation scene, when he says "You've been brave enough for one night, my son." and the despair in Lestat's cry after him in the scene where he finds the chamber empty and throws the bottle at the wall… made it all very clear to me. You must give kudos for the actors and the film makers for having this relationship shown
while the story and character persoanlities were so much changed. And yet they made it.
Though, I do think this relationship is seemingly portrayed a bit shallow-like with the stupid reason for Marius to have chosen Lestat (more of that in My View section) and with him just leaving the kid like that and not answering for hundreds of years… I think it does take more focusing on those emotional elements than it should, for a watcher to understand it, but it can be clear if you really focus on the movie, get into it and do not just watch it. The original script had so, so many scene versions showing the depth far better.
Though even in it the ending with the whole Lestat-Marius-Jesse matter is that totally wrong one.
While I think most of the things they changed and did with the movie are good for the film itself if they weren't going to be loyal to the books - the movie would've ended so much more realistically, effectively and believebly if they had done it more like the book's ending. With some of that discussion between Lestat and Marius, having them stick around each others (and thrown away the Lestat & Jesse pairing) AND included that Lestat and Louis's little adventure...
Because those matters would've ended the movie's story with the theme / fact that enabled it all: With Lestat being the ultimate rebel and getting kicks out of being bad.
Oww, fuck it. THE WHOLE MOVIE would've been impressive as a loyal adaptation of the books. Gah. Now it's just...a good vampire film.
Also, adding some of that discussion of Lestat and Marius's from the end, to the film's end, would've made such a powerful ending check on the relationships.
Especially the bit I already quoted anove. I mean, even more so than it already is in the book, because in this film's vision Marius does not deserve from Lestat such unconditional and strong love and worshipping that he gets.
As he quite clearly still does receive it from Lestat - (see my comments on the Film's Lestat & Marius scenes) - adding the ultimate line of Lestat's to the film after Akasha's destruction, would've made it so, so memoriable:
"You comfort me. AH of you. I couldn't even think of leaving you, not for very long, anyway."
This film clearly focuses on two relationships: the Lestat and Jesse bullshit and this Lestat & Marius one.
Too bad the first mentioned which they invented totally themselves took the place of this one that actually does exsist in the books and is also very vital part of them.
They so did not know how to make beliavable and effective ending which would've made their ridiculous Lestat&Marius storyline actually pretty cool even if still very wrong...
and... *sigh*... such a great ending would've also been true(er) to the books.
FILM'S LESTAT & MARIUS SCENES:
My comments on the Lestat & Marius scenes in the Queen of the Damned film & which is my favorite of them.
Below these my opinions on these scenes vs. the similiar in the books.
- Lestat's birth scene
is cool but due to the marius-magnus-personality-mixing bullshit, it was a bit badly done. The only moments of it I truly like are when Lestat notices the painting of himself and the moments when Marius is trying to feed him his blood;
from the point Lestat's freaking out to when he calms down by Marius's gentle and compassionate eyes, words & tone, and begins to drink. I heart those two moments in the scene but generally I think it too poorly done (not in acting, the acting is awesome in everything), to be picked as a favorite.
Of course the literal birth moments are also awesome. Crowned with that line "More!".
- The beach scene
is all in all great, it just lost some of it after I read what it could've been if the earlier scripts were followed. So it's not my favorite.
It's still very interesting and well done, pointing out Lestat's innocence and curiosity, and how he just couldn't understand what he had become. The beautiful night, the music and a new-born vampire on the beach with his father, ah. Perfect scene.
And the violin dueto between Lestat and the girl is really cute, too bad it ends tragically. But my fave moment of that scene must be when Marius has just told him to come along because it's time to go home, and Lestat doesn't move an inch, stares after Marius, then at the girl again and…with the perfect mischievous expression again glances after Marius and decides to approach the girl and her father. The whole thing is just crowned with Marius turning around still looking ok and probably just to check out what's keepinh the boy and then the most perfectly HORRIFIED look appears into his eyes.
- Well, it's easy not to pick (as a favorite) the reunion scene
for there are those three frustratingly extreme out-of-character lines, which are too distracting for me, even though the scene has many good and funny details too and generally it's great to have in.
(And not only because it added more of this pair into the film, heh. The original & earlier film scripts had even more Lestat & Marius moments in it and longer ones too. Sigh. *ddreams* And had they done this true to the books there'd have been all the more.) Bits I do adore in this scene are the "how did you find me", "I just had to look for the most ghose house in the block", they both are so sweet in that moment.
And the "it's what you've always wanted." "with all my black little heart" bit, especially when Marius then rolls his eyes at him. And of course the look on Lestat's face when he sets his eyes on Marius; Lestat looks so as if he thinks he's dreaming or doesn't see well enough but when Marius says his name, Lestat suddenly looks like Heaven just opened up in front of his eyes!
Which also makes his comment "Vampires don't settle old scores. We harbor them." and how Marius didin't seem to buy it, very cute. As I take that line as another form of saying "I'll never forgive you."
Which of course was a clear lie while he oozed happiness for Marius's presence.
But the earlier scripts' had this reunion scene a whole lot better in every way and not the least in not having any out-of-character lines there.
- On the stage
, ahh, I have hard time deciding between that and the favorite of mine. I love everything about that scene from the beginning to the end. As for moments in the scene before Marius appears on the stage, I love the way he looks at the vampires approaching while singing "the jury is coming - coming to tear me apart!" and his expression when he's gesturing them to jump on the stage - all
his movements up there are just so deliciously provoking, bratty and seflf-assurent.
But I love especially Lestat's gorgeous, happy smile when he watches Marius kick the vampires' ass in efforts to protect him.
But also Lestat's absolutely heartfelt and happy yay-jump when Marius had leapt on the stage and the fans keep on chearing - at the same time Marius too finding the moment great and his beautiful smile and applausing. And of course the very moment their eyes meet in the first place when Marius has leapt on the stage.
There's just so much love and strong bond in both of their eyes and expressions. And the actors play together so extremely perfectly in all this.
- My pick, my favorite - the scene after Lestat played Nicki's violin to Akasha
, (I refuse to think it has anything to do with the gypsy girl.) Somehow this scene just always was so very interesting with Lestat being 'high' with the liquid fire blood and Marius told the story of Akasha and Enkil...
Also this has the Marius' loveable line 'I don't think so, my little lord.' that I never fail to smile at.
And I looove the perfectly devilish chuckle Townsend manages to let out at Marius's statement of the statues not once moving in all the years he had kept for them. That chuckle is just priceless.
And Lestat's plea "Let me go." is amusing, though I keep hearing it eithe rin amused tone or in frustrated and am not sure which he said it in, probably both in the end as he did seem both, to think it's funny & ridiculous Marius had restrained him with chains, in other words was so serious, but also that if it wasn't a joke there's not a damn thing he could do about it
(as he didn't know what he had done nor that his powers had grown. And it certainly wasn't making it any easier that when he did find it out they were no use with Marius still being stronger and right there beside him, keeping him from breaking free anyways.)
And indeed, the moment Marius pinned his arm back and he didn't find a way to get away he raised his voice to announce "You'll not stop me!!", but clearly knowing Marius had won this fight.
I consider this a very entertaining way to point out Lestat's rebelious, bratty persona without extremeness of the rock star life thing.
THE FILM SCENES VS. THE BOOKS SCENES
How do I think they succeeded in using the books Lestat & Marius scenes in the film?
While making fan videos and getting extremely frustrated with the lack of physical affection shown between them and some other significant elements and events, I've had to give tons of thought to the matter.
In the end I think they did well if out-counted that damned Magnus-Marius mixing which was probably the only thing keeping them from doing perfectly.
The film's beach scene isn't totally invented by the script writers even though it's events are very different.
At least I'm pretty sure that scene was inspired by Marius forbidding Lestat from going back to Akasha and Enkil's chamber alone while he himself was gone but Lestat does it anyways just wanting to play the violin and it leads to rather dramatic events.
Only in the film it wasn't the chamber but the mortals that Marius told him not to go to. And unlike in the book, Marius was there to keep an eye on and save the situation before it got really ugly but in both he does and tells Lestat to do something Lestat obeys to only at the second time. And in the film as well, before Lestat disobeyd he probably honestly thought nothing would happen as he put it in his endless pleas for Marius to forgive him. Which he also asks Marius to do in the film scene even though not begging so endlessly as he does in the book but then again the situation is completely different. However, for the last similiarity after the situation is over they're on the beach, and Lestat's crying because he's upset. Well, in the film just almost crying, but still. And, Marius shows some of his infinite compassion...
(In the original script Marius also yells at Lestat first, though unfortunately not exactly the same words as in the book. Though if I remember correctly, in the book he rather raised his voice, but anyways.)
But I wish they'd done the birth scene more book-like in tone. The magnus-like attack was ridiculous and yet the gentle, compassionate tone in his voice and look in his eyes when he feeds Lestat saying "You've been brave enough for one night, my son."
was well replacing the book's "Drink, my young one. My wounded one." Had he also held Lestat up and to him like he does in the books it'd been pretty much perfect. As the whole turning someone into a vampire thing has always reminded me of a parent feeding their infant child.
But especially the book's scene since Marius was feeding him to give him strength.
Your feeding your boy to give him strength / to give him life, so hold him like the precious child he is to you. :] BUT as long as they decided to show the sexual kicks from the blood-sharing that high in the film, I'm actually glad they didn't have them so physical because slashers would've been all over it.
They already are with how the scene is now. *SIGH* Especially when Marius did not say the "drink my young one, my wounded one" whihch words would've told better the actual tone of the moment. And I'm pretty sure slashers minds in the gutter would never think of a parent feeding an infant anyways.
Lestat's claim about his family sending an armey to look for him is ridiculous. NO, they would not do that. The books make it more than clear that his father and brothers loathed him and his mama was there for him only in his extreme pain and otherwise cared more about her books.
If this son was lost, they wouldn't care in that way and especially not soon enough. The script writers clearly didn't give a shit about Lestat's character in any matter that made him who he is.
Lestat's suspicious toned "Who are you?! Do I know you?!" in all it's extreme oppositeness is actually hilarious, while originally in the book's scene compareable to this one
he was all hypnotized and then like "awww-yay-Marius-is-here-my-dream-came-true-!" and Marius hadn't even introduced himself, Lestat just knew it was him, and the whole scene was very sweet & gentle - Marius, was so very kind, gentle and loving with Lestat.
This film simply couldn't get more out of place scene.
The only in-character moment in this film's scene is Marius's compassionate eyes and tone when he says "You've been brave enough for one night, my son.", which calms Lestat down and makes him begin to drink Marius's blood...
right after those eyes, tone and words caused that sorrowful but now hopeful longing flash in Lestat's eyes. He clearly knew this person could become the father he had always yearned for.
I kinda like the film version of the whole Akasha and Enkil's chamber-violin-and-aftermath scene up until they ruin it with Marius just leaving like that.
He should've at least left a loving note or something. Which, like we planned with a fellow fan, Lestat would've torn apart in anger and then taped back together and carried THAT letter around instead of the stupid violin that wasn't even Nicki's in the film.
(No, the violin isn't stupid, the girl is. The Lestat & Nicolas story and relationship is beautifully tragic, it can't be replaced with some random chick from the beach that Lestat doesn't even speak to or know her name. HA.)
But I'd have loved to see in the movie the version where Enkil goes all psycho over Lestat - it turned out to be far more impressive and fascinating scene that I had imagined it might be.
And it would've shown how much Akasha and Marius cared for Lestat. Marius yelling (thourgh telepathy, not out loud) to Enkil just about to crush lestat's heart:
"Kill him, Enkil, and I'll take her away from you forever and I swear she'll help me to do so!"
and Akasha screaming, trying to make Enkil stop -
and the next moment Marius is there trying to restrain Enkil, telling Lestat to run.
The film version made it seem as if Marius was just somewhat protective and then would ditch lestat the next day. *SIGH* The film version of the scene was fine until they decided Marius just coldly walks out on Lestat, which couldn't be more WRONG.
Had they done the chamber moments book way and STILL had Marius ditch Lestat like that they'd deserved to be lynched at least twice.
2 things I'd anyways wanted to hear in those scenes are "I don't think so, my little lord." and "You dream, my child. You dream."
I already said quite a lot on the reunion scene which seems to be the only one totally not in the books. The original script, they should've stuck to it in this scene's case.
The "too late to come over all paternal", "you almost cost me everything" and "you've just become very hard to avoid these days" bullshit make me try to mute the thing or jump over or pause or anything so I don't have to hear them. This is probably just a face though, they were'nt that torturing all along, so I'll get over it.
It's just that the more I've thought the more I've come to decision those three lines sealed the fact this film's version of the relationship will always give the TOTAL opposite and wrong image of this very vital relationship of the story. Some cry out loud about Lestat's wrong hair colour. I cry out loud because of those lines. Especially as they weren't in their original intentions and it's so freakin' unbelievable they in the end came up with such absurdness.
In the concert. The way how Marius is the only one defending Lestat on the stage is very impressive and effective (and kinda makes up for some major bullshit between them earlier in the film though still not those three lines.)
I hope the earlier bullshit is the reason why they decided not to have Marius in the ice only able to try and reach Lestat through telepathy.
Both are great visions but I like better the film where Marius is literally there with him, as said because at least that makes it absolutely clear to those who know not the truth, that he would defend Lestat with his life and not just ditch the kid at any given time.
The only real difference in the book was that Marius simply was not able to get out from the ice to physically go to Lestat's defence.
Well, yes, though I also think the reason why Akasha prisoned Marius in the ice was so that the man couldn't get to Lestat and ruin her plans. But still...
as said, seeing to the film's slaughtered relationship - this physically on the stage with Lestat was the strongest and best scene to show what they are truly about.
Not only the fact this scene educates well, but to me personally it rocks my socks to literally see what WOULD have happened if Marius wasn't buried in ice. Especially as I said, the actors play perfectly together here. They do all the time but especially here.
CRITISISM ON WARNER BROS'S QOTD FILM F.A.Q
Originally posted to Fanpop's Queen of the Damned Spot's articles.
This is constructive. Basically I mean this to just anyone who's interested (and maybe targetted at those who adore this film and think they could not have done better.)
Some lovers of this film say; "it was only inspired by the books, so there was no need for it to be any closer to them" - but that is so not true. They do not mean us to think of this as only an inspired work and they did not work on this as such - the producer's words quoted in this article, make that very clear. And some lovers say; "of course it can not be exactly like the books". Well, true enough but it could have been much closer to the books if not exactly like them, and my critical analysis should make that clear.
Please remember – I am not one of those who object to any changes at all.
ON PRODUCING QUEEN OF THE DAMNED
”One way to define my job is to say that I am there to help first the writer and then the director do the best job they possibly can.”
If this really was the best job they possibly can do, they REALLY are in the wrong line of work. Hence, again, throwing away the books’s story, and character descriptions inside out, while supposed to be working on a book-to-film thing.
CHOOSING QUEEN OF THE DAMNED
”We focused more on THE QUEEN OF THE DAMNED than on THE VAMPIRE LESTAT because LESTAT doesn't have the bones for a compelling normal-length film.”
How? These things happen in The Vampire Lestat book; Lestat is made into a vampire. He meets and parts ways with Marius. Lestat wakes up. He meets the band. Louis comes to his mansion before the concert – only their movie altered Louis with Marius. Lestat performs the concert. The vampires attack him and he’s protected by those who love him. Akasha snatches him with her. ALL of this happen in their movie and are pretty much the whole movie. As in, there is like 3 or 4 scenes in the entire movie that have anything to do with QOTD. And the rest are their own made up footage from neither of the books – especially the final scene. How can they say that TVL doesn’t have what it takes to be a compelling, normal-length film and thus they focused on QOTD, when 95% of the film was clearly based on the TVL?
And may I just say, the book they DID focus on even if they say they didn’t, and even if they did butcher the book – the book DOES have a very potential content for a compelling normal-length film. Any real vampire fan would enjoy seeing something from the main vampire’s mortal life which really is intense in Lestat’s case – and the way Lestat came into being a vampire is the perfect horror thing. And for pete’s sake, there’s the vampire Nicki’s fate and Lestat and Marius’s TRUEFUL storyline which by the way also includes some very exciting and emotional (vampiric) events that are very relevant to the basic story, and then there’s of course the rock concert. TVL would make a wonderful normal-length film if someone who actually gives a shit about the books, was working on it. The thing carrying the film would be LESTAT himself. It's his story! Lestat is an extraordinary vampire character and he does go through some very impressive events in his mortal life and as a young vampire. How is that not enough for a great feature film even IF it doesn't offer any clear narrative spine? And of course the film would end to a cliffhanger, but so what?
I have said though, that because they link so strongly together TVL and QOTD would have to be combined but best if made into seperate films. But both books so very well have what it takes to be independent, wonderful, enjoyable films. Only – if QOTD was made, there should also be TVL film to explain the background of the story. They saw impossibilities where such do not exsist because they didn’t even try to see the books’s full potential. But what should we expect when they obviousy didn’t even notice which book they focused on.
”Someone who hasn't read Anne Rice's novels will obviously have no problem with our choice.”
If we are still talking about the book-to-focus-on choice – I doubt most of us fans would’ve had a problem with that either - if only they hadn’t buctchered the story and characters. The Vampire Lestat
, which they focused on even if they don’t see it - seems to be easily the best loved part of the Chronicles. And no wonder. After all it is the basic part of the story of the beloved vampire Lestat.
”People who are familiar with the novels will also have no problem picking up what we have kept or changed.”
No, indeed. We only have a problem in dealing with them, as they are mostly unnecessar and extremely violating everything. I personally have found some relatively good in there too though. But it’s not a great comfott while knowing just why they are there. Hence, the word 'relatively'.
”WB paid a lot of money for the rights to more than one Anne Rice novel. Why would they want to write off their investment, and let Anne Rice sell the novels all over again?”
I don’t think anyone in the first place asked or required a writing off the investment. People expected respect and appreciation towards the person and material who/which made the investment possible and worthwhile.
”As with many aspects of the film business, the fact that there was a deadline moved it to the front burner... but that happens all the time. Believe me, there was no big rush or sense of panic on their part to get the film made.”
So…. Isn’t that saying they made that insult with a lot of thought and concentration to it. They did. They were not in a rush but still didn't bother to even try to adapt the books.
”It was more like, it's now or never, so let's see what we can do. They were satisfied enough with the screenplay to give it the go-ahead.”
Thank you for putting into nutshell just how much they didn’t care about the books. No one who cares about the books at all – no matter how open for creative freedom, would give that screenplay a go-ahead just because of a dead line. Those who care about the books would’ve done all they could to gather together people who could do a fine screenplay in time. Actually, anyone in that situation, who cares about the books, would NOT turn down the books’s author’s offer to write the screenplay, or help in any way!!!
”...but thought that QUEEN would make the best movie of the ones they had.”
Then… Why didn’t they make it? It was bearly there at all amongst the TVL based content and the script writers’s own stuff.
THE EVOLUTION OF THE SCRIPT: ADAPTING THE BOOK FOR THE SCREEN
”The film story changed the most from the start in our first story meetings in 1998; it didn't change all that much subsequently. From the beginning, we felt that we would have to rewrite the "guts" of the story, because they wouldn't possibly fit into the length of a typical feature film.”
Then why did they buy the rights to any of the books much less to more than one?!?! Or why’d they gather together a crew that feels the only way to do it is to butcher it after turning down the author’s offer to write the screenplay?! I should’ve dedicated my 'Lestat HATES Jesse - Fuck You' video to everyone of those in those story meetings and to WB for giving it the fucking go-ahead.
”We didn't film THE VAMPIRE LESTAT first because it was even harder for us to find a narrative spine that made sense for a 120-minute movie. It could be argued quite well that the way to do full justice to Anne Rice's second and third vampire novels is to film them as a mini-series. However, this was not our mandate.”
I agtee. Mini-serie might be the best option but for Heaven’s sake. It was supposed to be a book-to-film; ANY narrative spine that IS from the book would make more sense than a narrative spine that has nothing to do with the book. Besides, Anne Rice had written impressive, memoriable scenes, original characters and beautiful, indepth relationships. Those alone would make a more sensible and succesful film than that pathetic, illogicly written pile of cliches, of which the worst is the nonsense Lestat/Jesse thing. And seriously, shouldn’t the popularity of The Chronicles in itself be screaming what a movie based on them should include, to be a success? What WERE they thinking?
”There is no way to replicate either the facts or the greatness of the Vampire Chronicles in a feature film.”
Yet another shining poof of their utter disrespect towards the books! Using the word 'greatness' isn't helping, you know. For there is an obvious way to do it and they were pointed to that road but they didn't take it and now they deny that it even exsists. Meaning; How about letting the author herself write, or help with, the screenplay LIKE SHE OFFERED TO? Surely the author herself knows a way to to replicate the facts and the greatness of her own work into a feature film. Know what the film should and should not include to do justice to what came out from her imagination in the first place. Especially as she had done it before! What the hell do they call the ”Interview with the Vampire” film then!?
”…movies by necessity tell tales in a very different way. The necessity of veering from the text leads to unavoidable compromises and the occasional inspired moment of originality.”
How is it a compromise to rewrite the basic storyline to be about something that isn’t in the books at all, and then turn the original characters and their relationships upside down or reverse them for the sake of that own addition? No sir, that is not compromising nor is it any ”occasional inspired moment” of originality. It’s a selfish butcher. And a paranormal-creature/human ”love” story isn’t even original, in case you didn’t know. Not that they even wrote a love story but that clearly was their unoriginal attempt.
”I hope that in the end, you feel that the scales tilt in the right direction. We will always have Anne Rice's books. The movie is, in many respects, something different.”
WTF? The QOTD film's scales aren’t even from the same world with the books nor in the ideals of book-to-movie-adapting art – caused for one by it being about a relationship that isn’t in the books at all and those that are, have been butchered for the made up one. Not to mention that the other character in that made up relationship doesn’t exsist in the books either by anything but name and the place she works at. How can they say the scales tilt to the right direction? You see, what we should have, is Anne Rice’s books plus as-faithful-as-in-any-way-possible movie adaptations of them, that would naturally be something different, but still at least the same story with the same characters. Hence, the IWTV film. That is the film where the scales tilt to the right direction.
”Answering as best I can, Louis is not in the movie because his role in the novel QUEEN is relatively insignificant and we could only include so many characters.”
For the millionth time, they did not focus on the QOTD book. But how is a completely made up thing; (Lestat & Jesse), better than a ”relatively insignificant” one, which however really exists in the source material?
”The liberties we took in the making of this film were a combination of necessity — a feature film is only so long — and creative license, which in my opinion is the right of anyone engaged in any creative activity.”
Oh yes. Hiding behind the creative lisence is very natural. Only it miserably fails when they throw away all the core elements and original characters and replace them with your own, multilating what remained from the books. It crosses the line of being creative. By a million miles. And in the end, regarding that ”we could only include so many characters”; they wouldn’t even have needed to include Louis in order to do more justice to what Anne had given them to work on - but just simply not make up Lestat&Jesse moments which were NOT in the books. The ending for one, would’ve been so much more novel faithful had they ended it with only Lestat and Marius. Lestat and Marius were in the end of the QOTD book (as well as in the end of TVL book.) It wouldn’t have even taken any efforts seeing to how dependent on Marius they had written Lestat to be and how both of them were right there in the final scene of the movie. *SIGH*
In fact, to do more justice to the book's ending they could've easily done it by just ditching Jesse from the final scene and have only Lestat at David Talbott's, trying to offer him the Dark Gift and then leaving and well, maybe Marius wasn't in the final scene of the book any more than Jesse BUT if they weren't going to include Louis, Marius is clearly the most logic subtitute. You see, in the book's ending Lestat and Louis walk into the night with Louis scolding Lestat for what he had just done. It is NOT weighting on any romantic atmosphere in the book. Louis is furious and Lestat is laughing his ass off, enjoying Louis's anger. Now OF COURSE Marius - the father-figure - would've fit that much better as a subtitute! Especially since in the books Marius has loud and clear forbid Lestat from meddling with Talamasca. (That could've been put into a line in the final scene.) And anyone who sees the Lestat/Jesse storyline for what it is, sees that having Jesse in the end makes no sense anyway.
They didn't have to include Louis. If they're problem was the limited minutesm they could've easily used the creative lisence AND remain respectful to the books as I just lampood.
”Anne Rice's books have been extremely popular from the moment she published her first one... but never mind that.”
And here I thought that’s exactly what you SHOULD (have) mind(ed.) Or maybe this film is like this because they did mind that fact, but in the very wrong way.
”Louis is not included, because dropping him is a very minor storyline change — he barely figures in the novel.”
Yes. yes. But what of the made up Lestat/Jesse bullshit. That certainly is NOT a minor storyline change.
”We realize that any changes at all to the novel's story will prove disappointing to hard-core fans.”
Yes, so… Naturally they decided it’s better to make every possible thinkable and unthinkable change to it, so that they’d disappoint (and piss off) every single fan and the aurhor herself. Well, that makes perfect sense.
”The complexity of the novel and the limits of a feature film's running time... not to mention structural issues... required major changes and deletions to the novel's story in its transition to film.”
In 1994 was made a perfectly accepted and loved film adaptation of one of the books into a normal-length film (123min.) Even the Harry Potter films are better adaptations than this shit, (yes, even
’The Prisoner of Azkaban’), and also into a normal-lenght films. Why don’t they just admit that they don’t give a shit about the books. It’s either that or they’re utterly unprofessional in what they do. There is ALWAYS a way to adapt a book into a feature film without bucthering it. It can never be perfect but it can be following the book's story with the book's chatacters. I find it funny they actually used the phrase themselves; "rewriting the 'guts'" = multilating the insides = butchering. And then they try to excuse it with complexity and limited minutes and other issues that would only take a little care and effort with respect for the source material, to overcome.
”The hard-core fan will have to let go of a lot of preconceptions, or miss what we have to offer due to focusing on what we don't.”
That is so true. Only, there is no room for preconceptions when the film footage screams bloody murder of the novels. But I too, have many times stated, that many fans are way too blinded by the changes. I’ve been happier looking for and finding some relatively good things in the film, even if I can’t ignore what this film does and don’t approve of most of the changes.
”I could add that someone needing to have read the second book in order to understand the third, has nothing to do with needing to have read either in order to understand the movie. While the movie has many details that will resonate only with Anne Rice's fans, it can be enjoyed with no exposure to either of the books, or the first movie.”
And that is NOT a plus point when the film’s story strays so extremely far from the original. It didn’t take any artistic talent to do it that way.
”My advice is to read the book after you see the movie. This would apply to any adaptation. You want the funnel to widen, not narrow.”
I advice the same. But not only for the widen/narrow matter but seriously, you will enjoy the film a million times more, at least for that one blessed time, if you watch it before reading the books and thereafter see what they did to them.
”Marius makes Lestat for the sake of economy. It happens to work extremely well from a character-motivation point of view.”
I know! I agree. It really does. But why the fuck did they not use those motives in the film then? Because staying true to the characters and their motives would’ve ruined their pathetic storyline by turning it into more novel faithful vision, as Lestat would not have become suicidally depressed and hooking up with a brainless, obsessed stalker whom he hates? Really, WHY didn’t they SHOW it in the film??!! Readers, hence, my article 'Marius as Lestat’s maker' (link in the end of this article) – it DOES work extremely well from the character-motivation point of view - these morons just didn't portray the matter through that point of view!
But nothing changes the fact that ditching Magnus in the first place, not to mention turning Marius into the cold one, was probably the most crucial change they could ever make. And thus basically very wrong. There is a reason why Magnus and Marius are two different characters. Two VERY different chatacters. The idea of Marius as Lestat’s maker greatly fascinates me personally, and Anne Rice knows this, and is "delighted that the relationships described in the books have the deprh to withstand differences of opinion and interpretion." But I mean for a little fanvision. Not a profit feature film that was supposed to adapt the books’s storý and show it to the world in a cinematic form!
”I agree that this is an issue of creative freedom, combined with various real-world limitations.”
Nah. Creative freedom is a good thing. It becomes an issue with the real-world limitations only if it’s used with the wrong attitude, like they did. In my view of the world creative freedom can and should be used anywhere BUT when it’s used while touching someone else’s work, it should be done with appreciation and respect towards the original work – and both of those attitudes, us fans and Anne Rice herself, feel they utterly lack in.
”My suspicion is that most of the people who object to any changes lack creative vision, and therefore "lock in" on what engages their imagination: in this case, Anne Rice's very creative novels.”
I so totally agtee!!
”While many of them feel, quite understandably, that Lestat belongs to them, as alive as he is in their imagination, they cannot comprehend that a filmmaker does the same thing... and has the mandate and the vision to do something different with it. That's what creativity is: starting with something, adding something of your own, and ending up with something different... maybe better, maybe not.”
Yes. But I’d say if you wish to hide behind that, write a non-profit fanfiction story and have it online. When you’re gonna make it so official and big as a movie released world wide and in means to make money with it, and even loudly announce it to be ”Anne Rices’s” – it really should be paying respect to the original instead of being just anything you happen to like and feel that was easiest for you to do.
”We changed who made Lestat because we couldn't keep every character, and Marius is a terrific substitute.”
He really is!! So did they have to fuck it up so majorly? They didn’t have Marius make Lestat. They had some bizzare combination of Marius and Magnus do the trick. Marius
would NEVER make Lestat (or anyone else) for the reason the film suggests and he would NEVER attack Lestat the way he does in the film and he would NEVER ditch Lestat the way he does in the film nor for such selfish reason that he states in the reunion scene. (Which doesn’t even make sense in the film version either, seeing to how he lays his life down for Lestat’s sake later. As in, how much is that if not almost costing him everyhting? I’m glad for that stage scene though. At least momenterally they remembere what Marius really was like with Lestat.)
”I don't think that the Lestat you'll see on the screen would behave differently at any point if he had been made by Magnus, and then abandoned... because something very similar happens here. I have little doubt that this won't satisfy you, but thought I'd let you know what the basic thought process was behind our decision.”
So they think he wouldn't have behaved differently b/c how they visioned their version of the evenrs - yet they chose not to use Magnus because they couldn’t include every character. So they must have understood Marius is the one more essential to Lestat in the bigger picture/in the parts of thr story they focused on.
But they went and butchered Marius’s character, turning him into this cold, shallow and selfish bastard, who occasionally had moments of remembering what he really is supposed to be like. Oh I can’t believe they saw the extremely well working character-motivation point of view but went on and screwed up anyway by using Magnus-like motivations with a character that is nothing like Magnus. Did they really think combining two such a different characters into one in anything but the concept of being the maker, would make anything but a weird mess.
Seriously; in order to stay faithful enough to Lestat's personality and behavour - it HAS to be either both, Magnus and Marius included without toching their motives and choices - OR including only Marius and stay true to his personality and motives with Lestat. Magnus is essential to Lestat's emotions and storyline but Marius is even more so, especially to Lestat's behavour b/c he became all that Magnus wouldn't be for Lestat and more, became Lestat's ultimate source of strength. This film while butchering that fact, turned Marius into Magnus with only a shadow of what Marius is. The film Marius was draining Lestat's strength. Not giving it.
This film in comparation to the books is the ultimate proof of how extremely important and deep affect the true Marius has in Lestat's character. So you simply can not do what they did, (which was mixing Magnus with Marius in more then the concept of making L into a vampire), without a horrid mess. If they weren't going to keep Magnus - all they needed to do to make it without throughly fucking up Lestat's character, was to then forget about Magnus and stay true to Marius. They totally fucked up with a very solid base to do realtively well.
On Lestat and Jesse
”In the novel, Akasha and Lestat don't hook up until near the end. We needed a human character to both be the audience's way into the movie, and someone besides Marius with whom Lestat could have a dynamic. In a feature-length story, characters often have to do double duty.”
Ok. Now we have to, for a moment, look at this thing as an independent thing. So; that reasoning I can actually accept. That basic. Relatively. As in, seeing to that they were not adapting the books's story but telling their own, to which that of course was needed. BUT if they were adapting the books, there would have been Lestat himself as a human for the audience's way into the film, and Nicki, and Gabrielle for the dynamic with besides Marius. (As again they were NOT focusing on the QOTD novel.) For their story I guess Jesse was the only choice if they needed a human; but what the hell were they thinking with the storyline for Lestat and Jesse?!
”Let me clarify that in our movie, Lestat and Jesse do not mirror Romeo and Juliet, although they do share some similarities. I agree that Lestat is much less likely to fall for Jesse than she with him.”
Good for him to see that! But I honestly don't think that's too far from plain unlikely, as they are forced to throw in "fate" because of the feeble base combined to no chemitry and unrealistic storyline. As follows here:
”However, certain aspects of her could intrigue him, maybe even remind him of what makes humans special... and then fate or circumstances could bring them together in a way that he would never have predicted."
Intrigue him, and the being human thing…? Makes a personal love interest/relationship truly potential, like, how? Seriously, people forget how deep and strong feeling love really is. And especially when in this case there sure as hell are certain aspects of her that would totally make him hate her, which easily and naturally outweight whatever "intrigueing" there might be. And so… Fate? HA. Fate is suggested always when logic fails! The same with the ”in a way he could’ve never predicted”. In fact, it only proves the point more, that he never found Jesse THAT interesting, since he never thought he would end up together with her.
And the logic really, really fails here miserably in every way. 'Cause really, what of the circumstances? Of course circumstances always bring together anyone and anything. But those particular ones? Lestat is lonely and suicidal, calling out for Marius even without an answer, and almost killing Jesse who had lied about Marius. Only a few days before Marius's return Lestat has been followed around by this Jesse who he clearly rather genuinely hates and doesn't want around (and really has valid reasons for that!) Well, yes, MARIUS COMES BACK and he and Lestat forgive each other! As for Akasha's part, she too strongly connects MARIUS and Lestat in emotional matters and storyline too. When he saw Akasha's true narutre it would most likely be Marius he thinks of, as he was the one who tried to tell him so but he didn't listen. It would be Marius he would want to talk about it and deal with. And in the first place he wasn't even looking for any romantic company but just company and attention, and particularry Marius he obviously loved and wanted back. So how the HELL are those circumstances put together, as all of them do matter, supposed to bring Lestat and Jesse together (the hate weighterd thing with a feeble base for anything else) instead of him and Marius (the unconditional love thing and 200 years of waiting for a reunion.) NO, in those circumstances you do NOT end up together with the chick you rather hate but with the father you cried out for 200 years and had now back in your life after a huge encounter with the one who seperated you those two centuries ago. So, seeing to that they had the ending the opposite of that, their little story meetings before filming began, were fucked up.
So… fate, (the substitute for logic that desperate people suggest), or those circumstances, they say. So basically they admit there is no chemistry what-so-ever and no realistic storyline, and no way in hell he would acturlly downright fall in love (romantically) with her. And as I analysed, the circumstances don't support the ending either. No way the film's end could have any emotional logic. So they majorly fucked up but can't admit it and throw in "fate" just in case. (He did mention the "fate" first, obviously uncertain of if the circumstances would do the trick and they indeed so do NOT.) But at least they admit he wouldn't exactly love her. At least they have a clue!
”The story is seen from the point of view of Lestat (the vampire) and to a lesser degree Jesse (the human), with a great deal of gap-bridging provided by Marius.”
Yeah, that’s just it! The gap-bridge Marius provides is by Jesse’s lie about knowing the man, done in outrageously selfish situation while Lestat is desperately missing Marius’s company. Hence, this gap-bridge lead Lestat almost killing Jesse and later on other things lead him to see her kind never satisfies his thrirst. And come on, if she wasn’t worth even to be killed… Whereas Marius, as just pointed out, was obviously in Lestat’s mind worth killing for. Marius is who Lestat yearns for in this film’s story. Marius does link them together, yes, but in a very, very negative way. Logically the gap-bridge would’ve crumbled down the very moment Marius leapt on the stage to protect Lestat. Hence, how extremely much Lestat had wanted him back and how that obviously was a moment of forgiveness between them. Why on earth would he care about the lying, obsessed chick at all after that, especially after already anyway, clearly messaging he doesn’t want her around. He had 15 billion adoring human fans from whom to find someone surely much more intriguing than Jesse could ever hope to be, if he really cared for that kind of thing at the point. The Lestat/Jesse storyline seriously is fucked up. Which is a major reason for why this film is pain for me as a movie buff.
Focusing the Movie on Lestat
”The Story of the Twins is a movie in its own right; if we told that story, we wouldn't have room for Lestat's.”
Agreed, except that they didn’t tell Lestat’s story anyway.
”We felt that focusing the movie on Lestat was the more pragmatic way to go. With less than two hours to work with, this meant no Story of the Twins.”
I’m totally ok with focusing on Lestat but maybe they should’ve still remembered the QUEEN to who the title refers to, and granted her more screen time in some way even if not through the story of the Twins…
”We kept Maharet, but only in how she connects to our main story. This is one of those changes that was all but dictated by the constraints of our situation, but that I realize is painful to all lovers of the book. You have our sincere apologies for not being able to give you everything that you wanted.”
Forgive me for not believing in their sincerity for that matter. I think it’s very clear by now, why.
”Many characters (Louis, Daniel, Gabrielle, Mekare, Eric) are not in the story. There isn't enough room for all of the vampires, and their roles seemed less crucial to the telling of our story.”
Yeah, THEIR story. They were never trying to give us a version of ANNE's story.
”If you're seeking a connection to INTERVIEW, then you ought to find it in Lestat.”
Yup. In name only, so who cares…
”Gabrielle is a very interesting character, but not essential to the novel, and irrelevant to the parts of the novel that we focused on.”
It still hurts my brain that they’re talking about the QOTD novel while they mostly focused on TVL novel in which Lestat’s mother IS a very essential character. As for the parts of the story they focused on, maybe irrelevant, maybe not… Having Marius as his maker in this case makes the matter a bit complicated.
”And I can't talk about Jesse's fate without giving away too much; suffice it to say that, given the nature of our story, our ending makes more sense.”
HOW? The nature of their story is that of eternity and loneliness; Lestat's struggle in that and it focuses on two relationships. The Lestat & Marius and Lestat & Jesse. Lestat obsesses to get Marius back, which makes obvious Marius means the world to him, and Lestat is being followed around by Jesse who he clearly doesn’t want around and has various reasons to genuinely hate her and he even expresses it too in words and expressions, then Marius does return to him and they even forgive each other on the concert stage, spending a quality father-son time - so, in the ending Lestat chooses to leave with his hated stalker instead of enjoying more of quality time with his long lost daddy, whom he had deeply missed for 200 years. How does it make more sense for the ending of his loneliness and in order to be happy, that he chose the company of someone he rather hates than the one he loves and had missed for centuries? GET A FUCKING CLUE, PEOPLE! They even admited already that it's not too likely he would fall for Jesse and seriously, as I already analysed, those circumstances in their story would realistically lead him into Marius's company and not Jesse's. And fate their ass. I repeat;They just fucked up and they can't admit it!
”Of all the VAMPIRE CHRONICLES, INTERVIEW is by far the easiest to adapt, in my opinion. While it covers an unusually long time span and is told in flashback, its plot follows one character in one plot, from point A to point B. That makes it easy to compress, and easier for the audience to follow. The rest of Anne Rice's novels in the series all have multiple plots... but not necessarily one throughline on which they all hang... and QUEEN in particular has multiple protagonists. This may help to explain, if not the choices we made, then why choices had to be made. Frequently.”
But the first choice they made was to turn down Anne Rice’s offer to write the screenplay for them – for completely free as far as I know, but in any case, she did offer and they turned it down. So there goes bye-bye their precious explanation for why choices had to be made when it comes to the story. Had they let the author do the choices and point out the narrative spine for them, EVERYONE would’ve been spared a LOT of pain and tears and THEY could’ve made a good money instead of a pitiful failure and having millions of Anne Rice fans dream of torching them alive.
On Anne Rice's Involvement with the Project
”Anne Rice has now seen the movie. You can hear her comments on her web site phone message, but I can tell you that she was pleased enough to offer the use of her name and possessory credit in our marketing materials.”
Hard to believe. Seriously. Either they put her name there without her permission or had it before
she saw what they had done. I really can’t see another way since she feels it’s not even her story ’cause it really isn’t. Not to mention she’s said on her Facebook ”it hurt me to see my work mulrilated like that”. Doesn’t exactly speak for the possibility of her having offered her name to use like that after
seeing the film. I repeat; I should’ve dedicated the 'Lestat HATES Jesse – Fuck You', to all of those who took part in writing the story. Especially after these loads of crap they keep saying for excuses.
THE CHARACTERS’ LOOKS:
”I agree that the color of these characters' hair is integral to their appearance in the novels. But they are not integral to their personalities. Personality — not hair color — is what a character is all about.”
Indeed. Wise words. But…
”So when we made our movie, we tried to remain faithful to the characters' personalities;”
*dead silence* …they’re…kinda…what… I… seriously got lost in words here. I can’t believe he typed that after what they did to Marius and (through him) to Lestat and especially after what they did to Jesse. I mean, yes, there is some
in-characterness left in their Lestat, their Marius and their Akasha and I’m happy for that, but those versions are driven
by personality features the script writers made up that are the extreme, utter opposite of what the original characters’ are. And just look at poor Jesse!!! They COMPLETELY rewrote her personality! Hell would freeze a zillion times before Anne Rice would write a character anything like that! SO how the hell did they "try to remain faithful to the characters' personalities"???? Either that was a really bad joke, a shameless lie, or they're mental and really believe in what they say.
The Film's Running Time:
”Do not carve this in stone, since the movie is not absolutely finished, and I don't have editor Dany Cooper around to ask right now, but I would say just over 100 minutes. It's not longer because, in our opinion, that's the best length for the material that we shot of the story we decided to tell.”
Oh, OH! So, wait, WHAT? They had the right to decide the length of the film, and they kept it that short for the sake of the story they decided to tell, indtead of letting Anne write the screenplay and having the running time as long as allowed to, in order to actually adapt the books with respect and care? They have been putting quite a lot of weight on the limited minutes during their answers and now in the end they reveal that. They really begged for the failure and hate, didn’t they? This was the final proof of how from the very beginning they had ALL the base, chances and possibiities to make a respective and good adaptation of the books but they didn't even try to try. Ultimately confessing it by admitiing, that from the very beginning they rewrote the 'guts' = bucthered everything.
In a nutdhell; this is what they thought: 'Ok, we had this thing for years to work on but didn't do a thing and now we're running out of time. OH this seems SO hard! Oh, it's creator offers her help in making it good. Who cares! She's only the author without whom we wouldn't have this thing, so let's just shun her out of this project completely! Now let's see... This is still so hard. Slightly wounding this thing would make those who love it, feel bad anyway, so let's just butcher it! Surely that's gonna be SO much better! And if it turns out a faulure instead, we can hide behind creative lisence, because, it's not like anyone else either would bother to think and so see ways to use that lisence with respect for the books, much less that anyone would have any common sense and artistic intelligence. And because of course no one has ever made or seen a book-adaptation to a normal-length film before. And thus we can also lie like rats! And it also helps that of course the author won't say anything that directly lampoos our desperate lies.'
How do they even sleep at night? They're wrong in the head in so many ways I can not even count!!
The refered sites:
X Warner Bros – Queen of the Damned F.A.Q
X Marius as Lestat’s maker (article)
X Lestat HATES Jesse – Fuck You (video)
X Never Yours – Lestat & Jesse Hate Site
ANNE RICE VAMPIRES & SEXUALITY:
Drinking blood and feeding it is a sexual toned element between the vampires / to the vampires,
and it seems to be the main reason why people think the vampires are gay. They fail to grasp the fact that the blood thing is naturally first of all just a way - the only way - to turn someone into a vampire or give the other one strength, and of course the only way to eat, to survive.
Thus - the fact that it happens to give the vampires the certain kind of feeling clearly doesn't mean sexuality to them especially when it gives the feeling every single time and regardless of who the vampires are to each other.
However, it may be a form of intimicity but as it's not comparable to human sex, they don't seem to have so much interest in it in other but above mentioned situations.
Marius and Armand had sexual toned relationship but that was before
Armand was turned into a vampire and it's anyways, not exactly the same as Marius was not human.
And Anne herself rather described that relationship as "sensualized love affair", instead of "gay lovers".
Louis, while still a mortal human, looking at Lestat through human being's eyes, describes he saw Lestat's movements as those of a lover but then he says also that right after his transformation into a vampire was complete, he saw Lestat differently - Lestat's being in his eyes
had changed from lover-like into just full of life - he saw Lestat as just another vampire.
In The Vampire Lestat
Marius speaks to Lestat about the feelings a vampire gets when drinking blood.
He does not compare it to sex in any level. He only talks about it as a feeling of pure happiness and such. As extacy.
So, what we see as sexuality, is to them merely a blissful feeling as a feeling and of a level no human can know. Nothing specific in meaning.
Besides, in The Tale of the Body Thief
Lestat's excited about being able to have sex again while being in the mortal body.
If drinking blood was sex(ual) to vampires, he wouldn't have taken that ability in mortal body as something long lost.
So where it may be some kind of a from of intimicity, the blood sharing, but it's prime purposes are anything but sexual type, it clearly is not comparable to sex as it is
and thus only hints to homosexuality but doesn't make the characters actually have such relationships.
This meets Anne's words "My vampires don't have sexual relations with each other or humans."
And even IF
there was sexuality the way so many think there is - it would be sad that they come out with such a shallow point of view.
There's so much beauty, colour and depth to Anne Rice's characters their relationships and stories
and the fact that there's no sexuality in the way these people stubbornly think, makes it all even more beautiful and briliant.
So in my view Anne Rice vampires are not gay and they're not straight. They're bi or omnisexual but mostly in it's concept.
For every possible reason Lestat & Marius are not gay but purely a father and son.
Here, read this if you like, for much, much more indepth analysis on the sexuality and love matter;
I have written an article on Anne Rice vampires and LOVE & sexuality - basing on my e-mail discussion with Anne Rice.
So of course this too is just my view, my efforts to understand the matter;
Anne Rice's vampires: Love and sexuality