The Queen of the Damned Movie Survey


Summation of results and comments therein (and I have something to say about it too...)




For those of you that were part of the Anne Rice fan community around the time "Interview With the Vampire" was being filmed, you can surely remember the fervor and excitement surrounding the film adaptation of what is quite literally one of modern literature's best beloved novels (okay, so it wasn't selected for Oprah's book club, but still...). Many fans, if not most, were aghast and horrified to learn that Tom Cruise would be portraying the vampire Lestat, second only to Dracula (and even that's questionable) in vampiric popularity. Still, most fans and even author Anne Rice breathed collective sighs of relief when "Interview With the Vampire" was finally released in November 1994. The film was as perfect a rendition of a novel as we ever hope to see in Hollywood. Though certain parts were missing and/or changed, the true essence of the film remained intact. Tom Cruise surprised pretty much everybody by nailing the part of Lestat; he subsequently became many fans' ideal physical incarnation of the Brat Prince. The movie version of "Interview With the Vampire" proved popular to both fans and non-fans of the books; the movie even welcomed many new people into the fold of the Vampire Chronicles community. It is perhaps these very fans (the new and old, recent and long-time) that await the film adaptation with the same excitement laced trepidation that preceeded the filming of "Interview." For all its (minor) faults, "Interview" proved to be a superb representation of a complex and some say hard to film novel. "The Queen of the Damned", however, is looking to be something else. As it's not yet been released there's not much we can say on the subject, but it would not be a stretch to say that many fans are upset at the prospect of this film, and for varying reasons. Whereas most of the protest surrounding "Interview" had to do solely with Tom Cruise, "Queen of the Damned" has a myriad of points on which fans can quibble over.

It is for those reasons that I have assembled "The Queen of the Damned Movie Survey." I wanted to know what everyone thought about the film, and if they were as upset as I was over certain aspects of it. I've received a pretty high volume of responses, and it's the purpose of this "article" to sum up some of the varying viewpoints I've received. I will organize the summary by question; my response/general thoughts on each question will be in bold face, followed by a listing of some of the best (or my favorite responses). I wasn't able to fit in everybody's comments due to the sheer volume of responses I received, therefore I picked the best and most well thought-out responses I could find, as well as the ones which I felt best captured the majority of opinions. Sorry if there's some repetition amongst the submissions, but some people just did a great job filling out the survey. I think most of you will get a kick out of reading the responses. The opinions are greatly varied, plus it's nice to get a wide perspective on what a lot of fans think about the movie. The survey is of course, still open, and if you haven't filled it out yet click here to do so. If you have any comments on what I've said here, please feel free to contact me.



Note: My responses to the survey questions were written at a time when I was not as privelaged to as much information on the movie as I am now. Like most other die-hard Riceans, I was shocked and angered over the changes, and that comes through in my responses. Over time though, as I learned more about the movie, and conversed with QotD producer Jorge Saralegui on the official movie board, I opened my mind and changed my opinions 100%. You can read about my new perspective on the film in a little article I wrote called "A Vamp Chron Fan's Journey Into the Light". The only reason I've left my answers as is, even though I have changed my mind, is because they were true when I wrote them, and I felt it would have been dishonest of me to pretend I never felt a certain way. Besides, my conversion to a QotD movie fan, supporter, and defender is even more surprising when viewed in contrast to where I came from. Take that as you will.



1). What was your first impression upon hearing there was a movie version of "The Queen of the Damned" in the works?

I myself was pretty excited. "The Queen of the Damned" is one of my favorite chronicles, and I had hoped that the film version of it would be as classy and well-done as "Interview" had. "Queen" is much more plot driven than "Interview", so I figured there would be a lot of great action to be seen up on the screen. In short, I was pretty happy. The more I found out about it, and some of the more drastic changes that were taking place, the more upset I became.





2). How important is casting in this situation? Who was part of the cast that immediately popped into your head upon hearing that "The Queen of the Damned" would be turned into a movie?

It's my humble opinion that casting can make or break a movie. A script can be completely amazing, but if you have a 7ft Chinese guy playing Lestat, it's just not going to work. Look at what happened with Tom Cruise; many people didn't initially care whether or not the producers actually intended on remaining true to the film--it was all about Tom. Fortunately, that situation turned out well enough. As far as my immediate cast wishes, I of course hoped that Tom would be willing and able to return, as well as everyone else from the first film, with the exception of Antonio Banderas as Armand. Don't get me wrong, I thought he made a fine vampire, but he was no Armand. I thought it would be good to recast Antonio as Santino (whom he'd be perfect for), and find someone else to play Armand.





3). What is your opinion concerning the casting of Stuart Townsend as Lestat?

As is evidenced by this site, I'm an ardent fan of the Brat Prince. I didn't have any immediate objections to Stuart. I was hoping for Christian Bale ("American Psycho" totally sold me on him), but like I said, I was sort of indifferent. As long as the guy does a good job and looks the part pretty well, I'll be happy. I know next to nothing about Stuart Townsend, both as an actor and a person. Therefore I'm not sure I can make an honest assessment of his actual abilities to play Lestat. I sincerely hope that he was as passionate and dedicated to the role as Tom Cruise seemed to be when he played the part; if said passion is there, that can only serve to enhance his performance. To be honest, the most I've heard Stuart say about Lestat thus far consist of relief over not having to wear a blonde wig. Not to sound overly-sensitive, but I sure hope the wig wasn't his biggest concern in accepting the role. In any case, I suppose Stuart's Lestat can only be as good as the people who have crafted the part around him. That is to say, if the writers haven't treated the character in the proper way, I don't think anything Stuart does could make that much of a difference. Needless to say, I don't think he'll top Tom's performance in my mind, but I'm willing to wait and see.





4). What is your opinion on the casting of Aaliyah to play Queen Akasha?

This one really upset me at first. I don't mind Aaliyah as a person or as a performer, but she just didn't fit my physical picture of Akasha. I'd always pictured Akasha less petite, and well, more "otherworldly" (though I guess the otherworldliness of the character is more up to the makeup department than the actor themselves). I'd hoped that someone with a bit more acting experience would have been able to tackle the role, because honestly, I'd seen "Romeo Must Die", and even though I'm certainly not one to judge, I honestly think I've seen better acting performances. Still, I'm glad that Aaliyah has atleast expressed a lot of enthusiasm over the role; she's obviously excited to be given the opportunity to play such a part, and she seemed sincerely dedicated to doing her very best in this role, and I think that's something we can all be thankful for. She's also a self-professed vampire fan, so I'm glad someone who's aware of and a fan of the genre will be involved in the film. She's certainly not my ideal Akasha, but I'm more than willing to give her a shot.





5). Assuming you've seen whatever pictures of the actors in costume the studio has released, what do you think of them? Do they make you excited to see the movie or just feel like puking your brains out?

I'm not entirely pleased with the pics. Sure, they're absolutely beautiful, but are they accurate translations of the novel? No. Okay, there I am being naive again, but I honestly didn't expect such stark contrasts to my own vision (not that I'm an authority). Aaliyah's costume looks like something a Vegas showgirl would wear, not an ancient Egyptian queen. I'd always thought that Akasha would dress much more elegantly. Sexy, maybe, but sexy doesn't have to mean half naked (need a point of reference? Check out some pics of Lucy Lawless in the Xena episode "Antony and Cleopatra"). Marius looks absolutely nothing like Marius. Stuart looks great, aside from the hair. I'm glad to see that Armand looks more like the boyish, androgynous individual he's supposed to be. And I love the way Pandora looks. Mael is a little more spooky than I imagined, and I'm not sure what they were thinking in respect to Khayman. Artistic license, I guess.





6). Would you like to know what the producers were smoking when they decided to make Lestat a brunette instead of a blond? Is it that big of a deal that Lestat loses his signature blond hair, or is it a detail that can be easily overlooked?

Ooh boy, did this one have me peeved. Lestat's blond hair, while technically just a surface characteristic, is an absolutely integral part of his character. A lot of people might consider anger over something like this really unjustified and stupid. But, it's not just the hair, it's everything that the blond hair implies--the angelic appearence, etc. Lestat is anything but an angel, so it's the juxtaposition of the angelic appearance with the decidedly non-angelic nature that makes his appearance so important. Lestat was "chosen" for his looks...however, since Magnus was left out of the movie, I guess the blonde hair becomes less important in that respect. I think making Lestat look like some goth-boy from hell is just bending to convention. Hell, Tom Cruise--Major Hollywood Icon--dyed most of his body hair blond for the role. I just didn't see the point in changing a detail that didn't need to be changed. What's the point in changing the color of his hair? That's like changing Lestat's name to Fred just because you can. It's my understanding that Lestat went brunette because the producers felt that Stuart didn't look aesthetically pleasing with blonde hair. I'm of the opinion that if you're going to commit to bringing a character to the screen, than hopefully it will be the entire character, not just parts of him. Would you make Snow White a blonde if a particular actress didn't look good with black hair? Probably not, because everybody knows she has black hair. And though I'm not sure Lestat has or will have the some cultural and folkloric impact that Snow White has had, or that he'll ever be remember like Snow White has, I like to think that Lestat's blonde hair is as important to him and Snow White's hair is to her. Besides, I'm sure the makeup people could have found ways to make the blonde hair looks less costume-y or fake. I guess this is just something I'm going to have to get over....maybe on the DVD we can have a version where Stuart's hair is digitally altered to look blonde? Seriously though...





7). Do you feel that the studio and producers are watering down the essence of Anne's text in an attempt to make "The Queen of the Damned" more accessible to the masses? Do you feel like the integrity of the book is being compromised in the process?

Sort of. Whenever a book is adapted to film, you're always going to lose something in the translation. Still, squeezing a 400 page book into a 2 hour movie doesn't have to mean leaving out everything. You can lose some of the details but keep the true essence and spirit of the book intact; that's certainly true of "Interview." The book is definitely being watered down, as it appears that only surface details and a few signature plot points are being kept whole. In this case, I have less of a problem with what is being left out than what is being injected in (and the whole silly, Lestat/Jesse romance is a huge part of that). I feel that has a lot to do with making it more accessible to the masses, and as bitter as this sounds, the kiddies who will most likely be flocking to see this movie. Such is life though. I don't really feel like the integrity of the book is being compromised, because the book will always remain amazing and phenomenal, no matter how bad the movie blows. Still, I'm concerned that a lot of people who haven't read the books are going to see the movie, be disappointed, and thus pass off on the books without even opening them. I'd also hate to see the books dismissed purely as "vampire fiction" solely because the movie appears to appeal to that sort of mentality. What it all boils down to though, is that we're going to have to consider the books and the movie as seperate. Producer Jorge Saralegui sort of hit the nail on the head in saying "[QotD] is not a visual presentation of [Rice's] book, it's a seperate work of art inspired by the book." I suppose I can live with that.





8). How do you feel about Korn's Jonathan Davis composing the soundtrack and performing Lestat's songs in the film?

I'm not happy about this one either. I hate Korn, hate them with a burning and fiery passion. I don't think Lestat would be singing this angsty-angry-metal sort of stuff. Let's face it, Anne's no song writer, so I'm surprised that her "lyrics" didn't make it into the movie. I'm more upset that they appear to making Lestat into one of these disaffected, melancholic suffering artists...it's just so cliched. Lestat sang his songs to challenge the vampire community; he did it for the thrill and the risk, not because he was unhappy and suicidal. I have no problem with the music being updated and changed to accomodate the fact that it's taking place in the present, and not in 1985 (as in the book). Still, I think they should have taken more care with the adaptation of the songs, and not turned them into some angry teenage "I-hate-the-world-kill-me-please" sort of rant. I don't know who's going to actually be singing the songs in the movie, but I'd always thought of Lestat as having a really sultry, hypnotic Jim Morrison-esque voice.





9). Considering QOTD is such a plot-heavy book, do you feel it would be better suited to a live action medium as a two hour feature film (w/ a decidedly larger budget) or a lengthier television mini-series (which, b/c of time constraints, would perhaps allow for a truer adaptation)?

Well, considering this film is technically squishing two novels into one movie, they could certainly use some extra time to accomodate all the plot extras. I only suggested a TV miniseries format because that would allow for a lot of extra hours. With miniseries you could spread the story over several nights and hourse, whereas with a movie 3 hrs is considered unbearably long. Therefore you're going to have to chop out quite a bit, and considering this is a movie encompassing two novels, a hell of a lot is going to go missing. A lot of people felt that a TV miniseries wouldn't be favorable because of TV censorship, but a cable miniseries would have been ideal. Look at "The Sopranos", or "Sex and the City"...anything goes on cable. A lot of Anne's work is currently being adapted for cable, so hopefully the Vampire Chronicles might get this treatment in the future. It'd certainly be interesting to see how it turns out.





10). Has the information that has become available concerning the movie increased your anticipation to see it, or has it only made you more certain that you will avoid it at all costs?

I'm certainly not pleased with a lot of what I've heard thus far, and the more I see and hear about it, the more I'm absolutely convinced that it's going to suck and I'm going to hate it. Still, It would be completely unfair of me to say that it absolutely does suck (as opposed to saying I think it will) without having seen the film. I saw "Titanic" even though I thought it would suck, and after seeing it I really did think it sucked, but atleast I made an informed assessment. If you don't see a movie you really have no business passing judgement on it, so if only to completely secure my right to totally trash this movie once it comes out, I'm going to see it. I would like nothing more than to walk out of the movies completely blown away, but I suspect that I'm going to have to work hard to view the movie and the book as two completely seperate entities, because they really are seperate. If I can seperate the two in my mind, I think I might stand a chance of enjoying "Queen" as a movie in and of itself, but as far as enjoying it as a live-action representation of my favorite book, I think that's shot (thank god for "Lord of the Rings", huh?).





11). Do you think film adaptations of books would turn out better if the fans of the books, not to mention the author (which is essentially a given), were in some way involved in the production process? I think we can all agree that an author's opinion on a movie being made of their book is significant, but should it matter what the fans think?

This question was purely a product of my rememberance of the fan outrage over "Interview." I didn't mean to imply that fans should be directly involved in making the movie, but I think producers would be stupid not to ask fans what they think before moving forward. Getting atleast some fan reaction and opinion can only help to broaden the filmmakers perspectives in making a movie; it can provide them with some much needed advice and info. Of course, if the producers aren't making this movie to bring a fantastic book to motion-picture life, than we'd be stupid to think that they give a rats ass what we think. I think it would disrespectful of them to not get some author input, however. I think one of the biggest reasons "Interview" turned out so well was because Anne was fairly closely involved with the production (writing-wise, atleast, since she pretty much banished herself due the Tom Cruise fiasco). Having an author give you some guidelines on how things can be done is only beneficial. I am in no way suggesting that producers cater to every fan-boy whim, but I can't see how it could hurt their cause to atleast talk to and take suggestions from the fans during the filmmaking process. It's not as if they actually have to listen to anything we say anyway ;-) That said, I do appreciate the fact that Jorge Saralegui, the films producers, is keeping in such close contact with the fans, even if it is post-filming. I think it's a reassuring thing to know that people involved with making these movies want to actually be out there and hear what we say, even if it's not going to change the movie as it stands now. It's also a promising thing to consider if future VC films are ever developed.







Main | Words of Wisdom | Mission Statement | Gallery | Links | Lestat 101 | The Vampire Bookshelf
Lestat's Lessons | Through The Ages | Essays & Articles | Queries & Theories | Signs of Unlife | The Vampire Marketplace

© 2000 BratLestat@aol.com