Movies We've Just Watched discussion

Horror > Interview With the Vampire/ Queen of the Damned

Comments Showing 1-15 of 15 (15 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by [deleted user] (new)

these were sooooo cool... i havent read the books yet, but i want to... has anyone else seen these?

message 2: by Phillip (last edited Apr 09, 2009 09:59AM) (new)

Phillip | 10782 comments i read interview with a vampire and saw the film. i liked the book more than the film. i'm not such a brad pitt fan, nor a cruise fan. but young kirsten dunst was kind of amazing in it. the atmosphere and tone of the film worked, but brad pitt just seemed like he was heavily sedated throughout.

i haven't seen queen of the damned.

message 3: by [deleted user] (new)

i think the 2nd one was better... Lestat comes back as a rock star, and tells the world about vampires... but none of the characters/actors come back from the first one, except Lestat, played by someone else...

message 4: by Jill (last edited Apr 09, 2009 09:05PM) (new)

Jill (wanderingrogue) | 123 comments Queen of the Damned tried to be Blade. It failed. It took Aaliyah's unfortunate and untimely death to keep it from going straight to video.

Interview was all right, but apart from Dunst, it was horribly miscast.

message 5: by Terri (new)

Terri (terrilovescrows) | 135 comments I think Queen was written before Blade and actually I dont see the comparison - the stories ar ecompletely different. The book was excellent - told stories of SOOOO many interesting characters. Not all about Lestat.

Of course I hated Cruise as Lestat, Townsend I liked better but not by much. Oh and in interview -- Antonia Banderas I like, but as ARMAND? Armand was turned as a teen I think - AND had auburn hair... Not sure if they CARED at all in the casting. And actually Dunst was rather old for the part too. But I did like her.

message 6: by Jill (new)

Jill (wanderingrogue) | 123 comments Terri wrote: "I think Queen was written before Blade and actually I dont see the comparison - the stories ar ecompletely different. The book was excellent - told stories of SOOOO many interesting characters. N..."

In regards to Blade, I was referring to the film Queen of the Damned, not the book. The film Blade was released in '98, Queen of the Damned was in '02. Specifically, I was referring to the way the film Queen of the Damned was filmed. It looked a lot like Blade. Rent the two and watch them back to back some time.

Incidentally, Blade, as in the comic book character, premiered in 1973. Queen of the Damned was released in 1988. However, I think you're right in that Anne Rice doesn't seem terribly influenced by the Blade character.

I did like the book Queen of the Damned. It was the last one before Rice totally went to hell as a writer (meaning she fired her editor). I did like the fact that you got to know so many vampires. It was a pity that that was virtually eliminated in the movie.

I agree about Banderas. I will state for the record that I thought he made a fantastic vampire, but he wasn't Armand.

message 7: by Terri (new)

Terri (terrilovescrows) | 135 comments Okay now I will have to watch them together. I was thinking characters and plot....

And yes the books definitely went downhill. Though my brother LOVED Tale of the bOdy Thief, I didnt really care for it. Pandora was okay. havent read a lot of the newer ones

message 8: by Faith (new)

Faith Quick (faithbquick) | 81 comments i love the books! i read them every few years.

i loved the movie interview with the vampire even though i still have a hard time with tom cruise as lestat. i didn't love the movie queen of the damned. it changed everything from the book. it was too MTV movie for me.

message 9: by [deleted user] (new)

The only thing I didn't like about Queen of the Damned is that it was COMPLETELY a different story from Inteview With the Vampire. Somehow, Lestat got... younger???

message 10: by Jaden (new)

Jaden | 4 comments Books were way better than the movies. I also found the first movie to be a lot more tolerable than the second, but then again the second book wasn't that terrific.

message 11: by Tom (new)

Tom | 5487 comments I read about half of INTERVIEW, before I just gave up on Anne Rice's interminable prose: nothing takes 5 pages if it can possibly take 20.

The movie certainly didn't work either, with Brad Pitt's laughable performance, one of the very worst of the 90s. And what Neal Jordan did to Antonio Banderas is a crime, pure and simple. That ridiculous hairstyle, and the white pancake makeup, and that ridiculous dialogue made even funnier by Banderas' heavy accent, like Maria Montez in COBRA WOMAN: "I am de oldesssst awff the vampiressssssssssss!" Tom Cruise comes off fairly well, by comparison, but the acting honors in the film go to little Kirsten Dunst who just wipes up the screen with everybody.

message 12: by Phillip (new)

Phillip | 10782 comments word.

message 13: by [deleted user] (new)

omg... i havent read interview (thanks, dad, GRRRRR) but i saw the movie... IT_WAS_AWESOME!!!!!!

message 14: by Mawgojzeta (new)

Mawgojzeta Tom: agreed. Dunst was the only one worth watching in a failure of a movie.

message 15: by St[♥]r Pr!nc:$$ N[♥]wsheen pictures, pictures, pictures (last edited Aug 25, 2009 11:59AM) (new)

St[♥]r Pr!nc:$$ N[♥]wsheen pictures, pictures, pictures ||| ♥ Zin Uru ♥ |||| | 482 comments Hi..I have seen Interview..Vampire and not the other. I think I like the movie so far, it wasn't gross at all. The movie has a real nice ending, it was even funny. I wonder why Antonio Banderas's face alone looks bloodless!!Maybe the director never saw a dead Spanish actor before lol

Kirsten Dunst was amazing as a child actor, I don't like her in the Spiderman movies, it could be anybody.

I watched Anna Paquin the other day, in True Blood, having what looked like a really soggy cake/dessert and ummm I think I am off cakes for a while. Haven't had the nerve to watch a full episode, the show seems to throw blood at you by the pint :D...where's Buffy when you need her?

back to top