Mix up Magnus and Marius... That was HORRIBLE. Gabrielle is forgotten, just like Louis, Armand and I havn't read the book for two years so I don't remember the rest of important people being erased. But the seriously important thing was The Twins. What the FUCK ? Where the fuck is the story of twins witches ?? (don't know the original name, I read it in french) It is the central point of the (hi)story: the Vampiric genealogy !
does no one remember that they couldnt even finish filming bc of the death of Aaliyah..thats part of the problem...but i still dont get what the big deal is..if you watch it without thinking about the books it is still a pretty good movie..
@aermbw It's an avarage movie, rather cheesy vampire movie an its basically potential plot line doesn't work because they fucked it up; it's not developing realistically the least bit. So I think it's hardly bearable movie if looked at independently. The actors were all very fine in their roles though, I give it that much...
@ihuggedyourmum I recommend reading them in the order they were written. 1.) Interview with the Vampire 2.) The Vampire Lestat 3.) Queen of the Damned. Those are the books that matter for the movie's case. The fourth book is Tale of the Body Thief. And I think the fifth is The Vampire Armand and sixth is Blood and Gold.
In my opinion, "inspired by" means something along the lines of someone watching or reading about superman and then making their own superhero- not remaking superman. -_- 'cause honestly, most that say that are really just ripping other stories off to make money.
@SuperPavian Yes, there is a book "Queen of the Damned" as a third part of The Vampire Chronicles series. But it is recommendable to read "The Vampire Lestat" first (the second part of the series) because otherwise a lot of things will come off as "huh?" because those parts are stronlg linked together.
tottally fucked up the books they just slamed a little bit of the 'vampire lestat' and 'queen of the damned' together with none of the essestial elements, just some flash with no substance. like it was magnus who made lestat no marius, no mention of how vampiresd came into being, no real aims from akasa aside from just drinking blood, they didnt even mention louis, armarnd or gabriell who played important parts in the book(s).
@Chrisdrumz Uhhh, no. I hate Twilight (I don't believe in fairies posing as vampires) I love the film adaptation eventhough they butchered the story, but hey, what do u expect from Hollywood nowadays? As a movie itself, it was not boring. Plus I enjoyed the soundtrack. And Anne Rice herself said that she actually liked Stuart Townsend as Lestat (I think that was the only positive remark she made in the movie. LOL) I already love the books, so I could only care less for Hollywood adaptations.
If the whole novel had been on screen, the film would be too long. Prose & film are two very different artistic mediums. There are scenes in the novel that would've been amazing for screen, for eg: when Lestat is talking directly to you. The scenes with Mael (love that character) and bringing Jesse's personality to the surface (she's alot feistier in the novel). I however loved the film. I like it when there are twists, the film deviates so we get to see something else (look at other versions).
They were not focusing on the novel 'The Queen of the Damned' even though they say they did.
And of course any WHOLE novel could not be in a film. Why are people even bringing that up? Because it's not as if there are just 2 options: include the WHOLE novel or butcher the novel completely like this. No, usually film adaptations take the golden middle road and succeed well enough.
Just read the article spoken of in this video and linked to in the description box, please, if you don't mind.
Why do you take what I say so personally? It was a causal comment on a few of my thoughts about the topic you've posted. I see the novel and film as separate, I don't compare them. The producer seems like a decent person who is aware of how it deviates. Plus this film is what eight years old, it's in the past now. If Anne Rice does green light any other of her vampire books, she has to use this experience to her advantage and really think carefully about who she sells the rights to.
Wasn't really taking it personally - just pointing out some facts that you seemed to have missed about the production in question and over-all in adapting. If it sounded a bit personal, then maybe b/c you seemed to completely miss the point of this video's content.
And there is no way for an author to know who and what kind of people will be working on the filming when they sell the rights. They sell them only to the movie studio and after that it's up to the studio who to have working on it.
Totally agreed. Let's look just the "RAW" definition of "adaptation". Does it literally not mean ADJUSTMENT to ones surroundings? So, in effect, they didn't ADJUST to the book to film, they BUTCHERED 2 books, combined the butchered pieces, and made up their own FOOLISH storyline!. Common sense: If you don't have the means, financially or talent- wise, to make a film PROPERLY, DON'T make the film! It will never translate to the purists, Once again, Stuart Townsend as Lestat, was the savior of it
Thanks. (: I hope it clarifies the point enough 'cause i don't know how likely the lovers will read the long article too as they'd have to read it outside of YouTube. :/ It is way too long to make a video of. :|
Thanks, and yep, Jesse's probably as out of character as a character can possibly get. And in a totally bad way. Even Harriet Oleson from 'Little House on the Prairie' tv show is more interesting, bearable and attractive personality than this film Jesse can ever hope to be. And trust me Harriet is a HORRIBLE person almost through and through. xD
I liked the movie a lot (except the illogic storyline) before I read the books, after reading them, not even nearly as much anymore even generally. I have watched it only once after reading them, mostly I just make the fan videos focusing on the books though it's extremely difficult with that shitty adaptation.
I think the books deserve a lot of love and respect as they're truly great, but some fans over-do it by taking it to almost religious level, which is not healthy.
Yeah, of course people by all means are free to like the film and not like the books, or like both or neither. They just shouldn't try to justify the film for what it is as an adaptation, b/c the production didn't even try to try but still advertise it as such and want us to accept it as such. That's just so low behavour from the production members - (out counting the actors of course, as they had nothing to do with the script writing.)
Mix up Magnus and Marius... That was HORRIBLE. Gabrielle is forgotten, just like Louis, Armand and I havn't read the book for two years so I don't remember the rest of important people being erased. But the seriously important thing was The Twins. What the FUCK ? Where the fuck is the story of twins witches ?? (don't know the original name, I read it in french) It is the central point of the (hi)story: the Vampiric genealogy !
AnimaeExahalare 1 week ago
does no one remember that they couldnt even finish filming bc of the death of Aaliyah..thats part of the problem...but i still dont get what the big deal is..if you watch it without thinking about the books it is still a pretty good movie..
aermbw 3 months ago
@aermbw It's an avarage movie, rather cheesy vampire movie an its basically potential plot line doesn't work because they fucked it up; it's not developing realistically the least bit. So I think it's hardly bearable movie if looked at independently. The actors were all very fine in their roles though, I give it that much...
TheElChivato 3 months ago
@ihuggedyourmum I recommend reading them in the order they were written. 1.) Interview with the Vampire 2.) The Vampire Lestat 3.) Queen of the Damned. Those are the books that matter for the movie's case. The fourth book is Tale of the Body Thief. And I think the fifth is The Vampire Armand and sixth is Blood and Gold.
TheElChivato 7 months ago
In my opinion, "inspired by" means something along the lines of someone watching or reading about superman and then making their own superhero- not remaking superman. -_- 'cause honestly, most that say that are really just ripping other stories off to make money.
seraphilight 9 months ago
There is the book queen of the damned?
SuperPavian 10 months ago
@SuperPavian Yes, there is a book "Queen of the Damned" as a third part of The Vampire Chronicles series. But it is recommendable to read "The Vampire Lestat" first (the second part of the series) because otherwise a lot of things will come off as "huh?" because those parts are stronlg linked together.
TheElChivato 9 months ago
tottally fucked up the books they just slamed a little bit of the 'vampire lestat' and 'queen of the damned' together with none of the essestial elements, just some flash with no substance. like it was magnus who made lestat no marius, no mention of how vampiresd came into being, no real aims from akasa aside from just drinking blood, they didnt even mention louis, armarnd or gabriell who played important parts in the book(s).
HBCjunke 1 year ago
How could anyone LOVE that film? Probably the same people who love MTV and TWILIGHT.
Chrisdrumz 1 year ago
@Chrisdrumz Uhhh, no. I hate Twilight (I don't believe in fairies posing as vampires) I love the film adaptation eventhough they butchered the story, but hey, what do u expect from Hollywood nowadays? As a movie itself, it was not boring. Plus I enjoyed the soundtrack. And Anne Rice herself said that she actually liked Stuart Townsend as Lestat (I think that was the only positive remark she made in the movie. LOL) I already love the books, so I could only care less for Hollywood adaptations.
AnGeLiKuS 1 year ago
everyone realises they slaughtered the story.
why fuss about it,it's happened,and the movie is still quite entertaining.
allthough the vampire chronicles are the most amazing series I've ever read.
Cattitude666 1 year ago
@Cattitude666 Unfortunatley, everyone does not realise they slaughtered the story.
TheElChivato 1 year ago
@TheElChivato unfortunately.
but the people who read the books realise it I hope.?
Cattitude666 1 year ago
cmon interview with the vampire was more like the books than queen of the damned.
sheliene12 1 year ago
@sheliene12 Well that's obvious. The IWTV production listened to Anne Rice and respected her opinions.
TheElChivato 1 year ago
If the whole novel had been on screen, the film would be too long. Prose & film are two very different artistic mediums. There are scenes in the novel that would've been amazing for screen, for eg: when Lestat is talking directly to you. The scenes with Mael (love that character) and bringing Jesse's personality to the surface (she's alot feistier in the novel). I however loved the film. I like it when there are twists, the film deviates so we get to see something else (look at other versions).
EerieAlice 2 years ago
They were not focusing on the novel 'The Queen of the Damned' even though they say they did.
And of course any WHOLE novel could not be in a film. Why are people even bringing that up? Because it's not as if there are just 2 options: include the WHOLE novel or butcher the novel completely like this. No, usually film adaptations take the golden middle road and succeed well enough.
Just read the article spoken of in this video and linked to in the description box, please, if you don't mind.
TheElChivato 2 years ago
Why do you take what I say so personally? It was a causal comment on a few of my thoughts about the topic you've posted. I see the novel and film as separate, I don't compare them. The producer seems like a decent person who is aware of how it deviates. Plus this film is what eight years old, it's in the past now. If Anne Rice does green light any other of her vampire books, she has to use this experience to her advantage and really think carefully about who she sells the rights to.
EerieAlice 2 years ago
Wasn't really taking it personally - just pointing out some facts that you seemed to have missed about the production in question and over-all in adapting. If it sounded a bit personal, then maybe b/c you seemed to completely miss the point of this video's content.
And there is no way for an author to know who and what kind of people will be working on the filming when they sell the rights. They sell them only to the movie studio and after that it's up to the studio who to have working on it.
TheElChivato 2 years ago
Totally agreed. Let's look just the "RAW" definition of "adaptation". Does it literally not mean ADJUSTMENT to ones surroundings? So, in effect, they didn't ADJUST to the book to film, they BUTCHERED 2 books, combined the butchered pieces, and made up their own FOOLISH storyline!. Common sense: If you don't have the means, financially or talent- wise, to make a film PROPERLY, DON'T make the film! It will never translate to the purists, Once again, Stuart Townsend as Lestat, was the savior of it
foreverfrantic 2 years ago
THANK YOU. Couldn't have said it better than that!
TheElChivato 2 years ago
I totally agree with you here. You got it spot on :)
KiraGarza 2 years ago
Thanks. (: I hope it clarifies the point enough 'cause i don't know how likely the lovers will read the long article too as they'd have to read it outside of YouTube. :/ It is way too long to make a video of. :|
TheElChivato 2 years ago
Jesse was very out of character (and obnoxious) in the movie and I really agree to everything that you wrote in this vid...
mostdominantdiva 2 years ago
Thanks, and yep, Jesse's probably as out of character as a character can possibly get. And in a totally bad way. Even Harriet Oleson from 'Little House on the Prairie' tv show is more interesting, bearable and attractive personality than this film Jesse can ever hope to be. And trust me Harriet is a HORRIBLE person almost through and through. xD
TheElChivato 2 years ago
i liked the movie,loved the book. i don't get what the big deal is all about either.
great video!! =]
LovrPeace 2 years ago
Thanks! (:
I liked the movie a lot (except the illogic storyline) before I read the books, after reading them, not even nearly as much anymore even generally. I have watched it only once after reading them, mostly I just make the fan videos focusing on the books though it's extremely difficult with that shitty adaptation.
I think the books deserve a lot of love and respect as they're truly great, but some fans over-do it by taking it to almost religious level, which is not healthy.
TheElChivato 2 years ago
So I like the movie, the book I did not like (except the place with Letstas and Louis again, that was great XD)
Of course, the story was somewhat disfigured but I like de film anyway, the music is good and stuard is sweet. (only jesse annoying XD)
foxxxy12345678 2 years ago
Yeah, of course people by all means are free to like the film and not like the books, or like both or neither. They just shouldn't try to justify the film for what it is as an adaptation, b/c the production didn't even try to try but still advertise it as such and want us to accept it as such. That's just so low behavour from the production members - (out counting the actors of course, as they had nothing to do with the script writing.)
TheElChivato 2 years ago