Tag Archives: vampire chronicles

How Do People Find This Blog …?

One of my favorite features of WordPress stats is the ‘search engine terms’ which shows you some of the searches that people have made that have led to your blog. I thought that for todays post, I would share some of the more bizarre search terms which have lead people to my blog and the posts that I think they ended up at. So lets have at it:

  • girl who gets eaten in ‘interview with the vampire” (I don’t think I actually addressed this one in Book vs Film: Interview with the Vampire. My bad. There were a few of them though.)
  • showhowmolloyisturnedininterviewwiththevampire (This one I did answer. But maybe a working space bar would help your searches.)
  • why beauty and the beast has so many continuity errors (I ask myself this every day. And I tried to provide an actual answer to it in A Guide to the Plot Holes in Beauty and the Beast )
  • why i hate big bang theory (I have a post for that, creatively titled Why I Hate Big Bang Theory )
  • lucy big bang theory social anxiety (And this is why I hate it. Not the character, but the characterization of social anxiety)
  • i hate the big bang theory (I’m sensing a theme here….)
  • i fucking hate raj from big bang theory
  • big bang hate
  • i/ hate lucy from big bang theory
  • big bang theory insulting social anxiety
  • why i hate penny big bang theory 2014 (I haven’t posted about Penny yet. I do hate her but for entirely different reasons)
  • hate raj big bang theory (Yeah he sucks.)
  • harry potter do you love me (I have one on Harry Potter: Important Quotes ?)
  • animated younger brother mischief (If its about siblings, then they probably found my Top Five Animated Siblings )
  • black widow “aromantic” (Something I hope for but haven’t written about.)
  • manga sibling complex popluar brother and normal sister (…Probably Top Five Animated Siblings again. But they were probably disappointed… I’d read that manga.)
  • why are boys afraid of periods (It probably says something about society that I have 5 of the exact same searches asking Why Are Men So Afraid of Periods? )
  • erotic disney beauty beast (…..Why?)
  • isn’t ballet ppainful (Yes. Yes it is. It’s pretty Badass)
  • sexy heroine wearing no dress (That is the exact opposite to the subject of Issues with Super-heroine Costumes.)
  • peter patter grew harry potter (Oh yes. I talked about Mr Patter Grew extensively in The Symbolism Behind the Marauders )
  • rat guy harry potter (Now you’re not even trying.)
  • anime boobs comparison chart (I weep for humanity.)
  • how i had sex with a demon (My demons are a bit less promiscuous. They tell me Not to Have Sex)
  • sex demon chastity (What were you hoping to achieve when you searched this?)
  • sabina altynbekova fanart (I argued against the fanart stuff in How Internet Admiration Can Ruin Women’s Careers)
  • sabina altynbekova fuck hard (For fucks sake.)
  • vanellope at hogwarts fanfiction (I talk about Vanellope in Disney’s Non Princess Heroines. But there was no Hogwarts involved. I deeply apologize.)
  • venellope at hogwarts fanfiction (You were right the first attempt.)
  • mowgi’s temptress (SHE SHOULD NOT BE CALLED A TEMPTRESS! And I argue why the child shouldn’t be classified as a temptress in Disney’s Non Princess Heroines)
  • remus lupin sirius black jk rowling evidence (I don’t have a post on this and now I want to write one.)
  • barney stinson rape culture (Barney Stinson: The Rapist. I’m always happy when people acknowledge that he’s not charming, he’s a rapist.)
  • the girl who didnt get the role in the hercules 2014 because she was to pretty (I have no idea. But now I want to know. I’m afraid I just wrote about Disney’s Hercules)
  • drew barrymore lost virginity (Jesus Christ guys.)

And on that note… I look forward to more weird and wonderful searches in the future. Thank you to everyone who typed something into google and accidentally ended up in at my blog. I really appreciate it.

Advertisements

The Power of Fanfiction

In the class ‘Harry Potter: The Age of Illusion’ at Durham University, I learnt a lot about the ‘potter-verse’ and all of the different aspects which go into creating the fictional universe, for example; the books, the films, interviews with JK Rowling etc. And the main thing that I took away from the class with this; fanction isn’t all that bad. In fact, our first piece of homework was to read one of our lecturers favourite fanfictions (which can be found here if anyone is interested: Hogwarts Houses Divided). We also looked at ‘drapple’ in class, but that’s another story…

There are a lot of arguments against fanfiction which largely really on the legal standpoint of copyright infringement. But on the whole fanfiction is a pretty great phenomenon because it expands the fictional universe. Let’s face it, we don’t really know a lot about the marauders school days because Rowling didn’t write a great deal about then. But through fanfictions, headcanons, fanart etc we all have a shared idea of what the era was like. (The only large disputes over the era which I’ve seen are about the characterisations of teenage Peter and Snape which, given their actions later in life, is understandable).

Fans are able to pick up a universe and expand it as a community, which is something that even Rowling advocates. And this is why I think that it’s a shame when authors expressly ban fanfiction of their work. Fanfiction.net gives a list of all of the authors who have banned fanfiction which includes;
• Anne Rice
• P. N. Elrod
• Archie Comics
• Dennis L. McKiernan
• Irene Radford
• J.R. Ward
• Laurell K. Hamilton
• Nora Roberts/J.D. Robb
• Raymond Feist
• Robin Hobb
• Robin McKinley
• Terry Goodkind

This is always disappointing because fictional worlds such as that created by Anne Rice through the Vampire Chronicles are perfect for fan expansion. I want to see more interview with the vampire head canons. I want more fan castings (we need them after the terrible castings of the movies of both Interview with the Vampire and Queen of the Damned). I want as many au’s as humanely possible. But alas, the restrictions mean that it isn’t likely to happen anytime soon.

Let me know what you think about fanfiction in the comments. Like me, do you get a bit disheartened when the author limits the potential for fan expansion of their universes or do you think that it’s their choice?

Book vs Film: Queen of the Damned

As bad an adaption as Interview with the Vampire is, it is a fact, universally acknowledged, that Queen of the Damned is so much worse. Warner Bros. had ten years to make films out of the first three Vampire Chronicle novels; Interview with the Vampire, The Vampire Lestat and Queen of the Damned. The studio was already into its last year of owning the rights before they would have transferred back Anne Rice, so in a frantic rush the remaining two books were squished into one movie which just barely resembled its source material.

Characters:

In my blog about Interview with the Vampire, I pointed out that one of the most drastic changes of the film were the difference in character designs. Queen of the Damned has very similar issues, there are also a number of key characters who were just ignored. To name a few; Louis de Pointe du Lac (remember him from the first film?), Nicolas de Lenfent (a personal favourite of mine), Gabrielle (Lestats mother), Baby Jenks and the Fang Gang, Daniel, Mekare, etc.

Tom Cruise in Interview with the Vampire was a pretty accurate depiction of Lestat de Lioncourt. He turned down the role, which was instead given to Stuart Townsend. So instead of our blond haired, blue eyed Frenchman, we get;

Image

No you are not. I actually think Stuart Townstead behaved more like Lestat when he was depicting Dorian Grey in The League of Extraordinary Gentleman.

We also have Marius. Marius is described in the book as being a tall Roman, with long blond hair. The film variant doesn’t have quite the same impact.

Image

But a large part of Marius’ characterisation was that he had dibs on the colour red, so at least they got that right.

Similarly, we have David, who is seventy years old (until The Tale of the Body Thief, where he gets a hot new body). The David in the film isn’t quite as aged as his original counterpart, probably to hint that he could have a relationship with Jesse without it being creepy.

Image

Remember the terrible depiction of Armand in Interview with the Vampire? Well, our red headed cherub now looks like this:

Image

Yeah, I don’t think they tried either.

Plot Changes:

The film focuses mainly on Lestat, which is a shame because the novel Queen of the Damned skipped around a lot, showing what different vampires were doing whilst Lestat was gearing up to his concert. One of the best of these subplots was the relationship between Armand and Daniel, and I will forever be upset that this got no screen time. Just look at these cuties:

Once Armand had dragged Daniel out of bed in New Orleans and shouted at him: “That telephone, I want you to dial Paris, I want to see if you can really talk to Paris.”

“Goddam it, do it yourself,” Daniel had roared “You’re five hundred years old and you can’t use a telephone? Read the directions. What are you? An immortal idiot? I will do no such thing!” How surprised Armand had looked. “All right, I’ll call Paris for you. But you pay the bill.”

“But of course,” Armand had said innocently. He had drawn dozens of hundred-dollar bills out of his coat, sprinkling them on Daniels bed.

I can see why they focus is predominantly on Lestat, as the premise for the film was it combines The Vampire Lestat with Queen of the Damned. However, they might as well have just skipped The Vampire Lestat all together as they did almost nothing about Lestat’s history and what they did, they got wrong. Nicholas and Gabrielle were completely ignored, which is a shame as they had a massive impact on Lestats development. Then there’s the artistic license of Marius being Lestat’s creator. In the novel, Lestat works as a performer and is stalked by Magnus who kidnaps him and turns him into a vampire shortly before burning himself. This explains why in the first film, Lestat references that he had no choice in his becoming a vampire and that he was never taught the finer aspects of being a vampire. Marius is instead Armands creator, but this is changed for the film and if you accept that Marius was Lestats maker, Lestat just seems like a bit of a jerk when he won’t tell Louis anything that he learnt. On a similar note, Marius didn’t turn Daniel into a vampire either. He seems to keep getting the blame for that…

If you want a more accurate depiction of Lestats history, you’re probably better off checking out the Elton John musical ‘The Vampire Lestat’. The script is pretty terrible and it’s easy to see how it was cancelled, but there are videos floating about and it’s worth taking a look at.

Due to the increased focus on Lestat, the film misses out the biggest plot point of Queen of the Damned; the tale of the twins. The twins Maharet and Mekare (who was left out of the film completely) were witches in Ancient Egypt. When they tried to eat their mother’s heart and brain at her funeral (following their customs), Akasha sent out an army who killed everyone and kidnapped the twins. The twins were raped by Khayman as punishment and Maharet had a baby (which is how she has human descendants). Mekare called on a spirit, Amel, to help her and the spirit developed a taste for blood, and ended up in the body of Akasha, who became the first vampire. This was completely left out of the films and nothing about the history of vampires is explained other than the fact that Akasha is the oldest around.

By cutting out a lot of Lestats back story, what they kept in needed to be altered to make sense. So in the film, Lestat plays the violin which just happens to fly off and alert him to the presence of the secret chamber. First off, Lestat was never a musician. He was an actor and Nicholas was the musician, known for his violin playing. Of course, they cut Nicholas out of Lestats history, something that I can never forgive them for. Similarly, in the book Marius shows Lestat the temple which he made, instead of Lestat just happening to stumble across it; a much flimsier plot-point.

As well as ignoring the history of the vampires, Queen of the Damned misunderstands Rices physiology. In the film, Lestat is able to walk out into the sun unharmed. Which isn’t how vampires work. At his strongest point in the books, Lestat flies as high as he can towards the sun during daylight and, although he does survive, he suffers very extreme burns. However, this film does introduce Rice’s depiction of vampires crying blood which is interesting as the Interview with the Vampire movie ignored this completely.

Interview with the Vampire very obviously glossed over the homo-eroticism of its source material. Similarly in Queen of the Damned, instead of being reunited with Louis, Lestat ends up with Jesse. Lestat does have female lovers during the course of the books, but never Jesse. It seems more like an attempt to give him a typical ‘happy ever after’ in which he gets the girl.

Interestingly the most accurate part of the film is an exchange between Marius and Armand which was deleted from the final cut:

Marius: Armand?
Armand: You thought I was dead and gone…
Marius: You sound bitter.

If you’ve read Blood and Gold, you’ll know that this is pretty hilarious, given the relationship between the pair. This is also the scene were a lot of the Ancients were introduced, so if you haven’t read the books, you’ll have absolutely no idea who these characters are. Poorly played movie.

That’s all I have to say for this review. Let me know what you think about this awful adaption. In closing, I’ll leave you my favourite piece of movie trivia:

Stuart Townsend (who played Lestat) shares his name with a character from another Anne Rice novel, The Witching Hour. Upon meeting Townsend, Rice handed him a copy of the book and instructed him to turn to a certain page number, whereupon was written ‘The Life of Stuart Townsend’. Townsend was flattered that she had written him into her new book, until she told him that she had written it eleven years prior.

 

Book vs Film: Interview with the Vampire

‘Interview with the Vampire’ by Anne Rice has possibly the worst film adaptions in existence, with the exception being its sequel, but I’ll get to that travesty later…

I’m always surprised when Anne Rice’s name appears on the opening credits, indicating that she wrote the screen play. However, I recently learnt that despite the fact that the opening screen credits read “Screenplay by Anne Rice based on her novel”, the script was actually heavily edited by the director Neil Jordan and the Writers Guild rules meant that Rice got credit despite the alterations. This makes more sense given the drastic deviations from the original storyline, but I have seen some references to Anne Rice being incredibly pleased with the adaptation, calling is a “masterpiece”. So it’s difficult to tell exactly how she feels about the differences.

Characters:

One of the most noticeably difference comes from the depictions of the main characters.

Tom Cruise is the closest to resembling his character, however he did have to be placed on an elevated platform during some scenes to reduce the height difference between his character and other vampires. The largest difference is the pronunciation of his name, in the novels it’s made very clear that Lestat is pronounced Les-dot, due to his French background. All in all, the depiction of Lestat was alright (until the sequel, but that’s a whole other blog post).

Image
Similarly, Brad Pitt is pretty similar to Louis, he may have the wrong hair colour (Louis is described as having black hair), but overall Louis looks pretty much like he should.
Image

Daniel however, looks nothing like he should. In the books, Daniel has blond hair, violet eyes, and is a great deal younger than he’s depicted in the film, in the first book he’s only referred to as ‘The boy’. The film also manages to misspell his surname, instead of Daniel Molloy we get Daniel Malloy who looks nothing like his origins;

Image

I can see why Claudia is depicted differently in the film. The original Claudia is a six year old who has the mind of a fully-functioning adult. It would be incredibly difficult to cast a six year old that fits the bill, so I’ll let them off with the twelve year old

Image

However, I can’t forgive them for what they did to Armand. In the books, Armand is a red-headed, cherub-looking teenager who was born in Russia and then raised then in Italy. And who do we get…?

Image

That’s right folks! Antonio Banderas. Not who I was picturing either…

Plot Changes:

The most glaringly difference between the film and the books is the lack of gay vampires. The Vampire Chronicles are well known for their homo-eroticism which they tried to cover up throughout the film. One of the best scenes in the novel is where shortly after turning Louis into a vampire, Lestat reveals that he has conveniently forgotten that Louis would need a separate coffin, and thus the pair have to sleep together. This was obviously ‘too gay’ for the film, and Louis instead occasionally shares a coffin with Claudia.

Image

The film is constantly pushing the fact the idea that Louis and Claudia are involved, however in the original material the trio create a family with Lestat as the father, Louis as the mother and Claudia as their daughter. This cover up of the characters homosexuality means that the ending of the film had to be changed, where Louis and Armand end up together in the book, the couple almost share a kiss on screen and then go their separate ways. Similarly, a lot of the back stories of the characters were changed and in Louis’ case this appears to be an attempt to solidify his heterosexuality. Instead of the cause of Louis’ depression being the death of his brother, Louis was instead given a wife and children for his angsty back story.

There are also a number of issues with the depiction of vampires’ physiology. When turning Louis, Lestat appears to fly, which is an ability he doesn’t gain until far later on in the book series. Furthermore, when the vampires cry in the film, they cry normal tears. Anne Rice’s vampires are supposed to cry blood, a trait which is better depicted in the True Blood TV series.

The ending of the film suggests that Lestat turned Daniel in to a vampire. Which isn’t at all what happened in the novel. Daniel wanted to find Lestat, but found Armand instead. The pair started a relationship and Daniel wasn’t turned into a vampire until the third novel in which Daniel is dying from alcohol poisoning and Armand finds that he has no other choice than to turn him.

Overall, a lot of the plot is drastically changed, and Interview with the Vampire is a pretty good example of the systematic erasure of queer characters in the media. Which isn’t exactly what you’d expect if you’ve read the books…

Let me know what you think! Did you love or hate the adaptation of Interview with the Vampire? Did it live up to your expectations? Let me know in the comments.