killray

(2012-04-28 21:22:43)

Better than the last attempt

I just watched this film twice in the last 3 days. I had been eagerlylooking forward to it. It is a good thing they skipped to making the thirdbook into a movie, since the first left WAY too much out as those whoactually READ the books know. Now, to the actual movie. First thing Inoticed that made me happy is that they made Lestat more like the Lestat inthe book. It stayed more true to the character. Tom Cruise's portrayal madeLestat into a fop. Another thing I was pleased about was that Lestat thistime had a mild FRENCH accent. This time they remembered he was a FRENCHnobleman. The actor portraying Marius is not what I pictured and tended tolean more towards Armands personality in the books, but did a good job nonethe less. Once again though, they took many many artistic licenses in thestory. (ie: as you know, Marius did NOT "make" Lestat )As for the Queen, I think she was underplayed. But I found it interesting.ESPECIALLY her accent. Since none of us (mortals at least...:) ) KNOWS theEXACT dialect the ancient (6,000 years ago) Egyptians spoke, What I heardfrom her sounded a great deal like the way Yul Brenner sounded playingRamseys. But hey good news to those other Anne Rice fans........They didn'ttake as many liberties with the ages of he characters as they did in thefirst one. Armand actually looks like he is described. He is quite young inappearance, not in his 30's, but they did make David about 25 years tooyoung. There are several scenes that they should have kept but didn'tunfortunately. Was I the only one hoping to see Jessie's experience in theNew Orleans Town house? Not there. Also they left out several keycharacterslike a twin for one. And still, with all this, I really enjoyed the filmregardless of the deletions. The only part I really didn't like was thatthe"showdown" scene was too short and kind of anti climatic. I would stillrecommend this movie to all people ESPECIALLY fans of the book. It is niceto see what they did RIGHT this time.

gypsy129

(2012-04-28 07:51:57)

guilty pleasure

Ah, yes, I was adamant that I would never see this movie, being a huge fanof Anne Rice, and knowing the back story with the script and rights to thestory - knowing that Mrs. Rice had taken her name off of it. I knew itwasgoing to be nothing like the book, and I didn't want to have any part ofit.Then all of a sudden Anne's name was on it again? Could it be that shesold out? So at a particularly desperate moment in life I decided, well,why not, and went to see the movie....and I fell in love. Saw it even a few more times after that. Can'twaitfor the DVD. "Explain yourself!!" you shout at me. Wellokay...I went to see it with no expectations, knowing that it would be nothinglikethe book - and that the actors were going to have no physical resemblancetothe characters and that there would be a gratuitous love story thrown inforthe kiddies - and that's what I got - I got a totally enjoyable VAMPIREflick. With a totally intriguing lead character. With perfect music, andbeautiful and unique fight sequences.I will be the first to tell you that this movie should not have beencalledQueen of the Damned, and Anne Rice should have signed off on it and stayedthat way - but I will also admit that it was fun. A simple fun movie forthose of us out there who can handle a movie with little meaning and canallow ourselves to "dumb down" for a little just to enjoy some beautifulpeople and sights, without needing great dialogue or intricate plot.(don'tget me wrong, I will very rarely allow myself to do that...yes I'mpretentious when it comes to film, I'll also admit that)But overall, if you're having a slumber party, rent it. If you're havingafew friends over, rent it. And definitely, if you've had a crap day atwork, and want nothing more than to settle into the couch with aFrangelicoand cream, rent it, and allow yourself some escapism for an evening.It'llmake you feel better.

joelroussel

(2012-04-27 21:43:24)

Majority report

For once, I agree with most comment reports on this movie. It could havebeen great,since it features many valuable items (soundtrack, image, special FX, somepretty goodacting, too).But the whole of it leaves you thirsty, and gets you saturated with"gothicware".This movie is not really a film, it's a sophism..

Peter Bott

(2012-04-27 12:05:25)

As a stand alone vampire flick, it's worth seeing.

Combining The Vampire Lestat and the Queen of the Damned novels into onescreenplay was, ahem, damned to suffer massive story cuts because of theintricate and detailed background of a dozen or so characters involved.Theamount of detail always was the strength of the Vampire Chronicles, in myopinion, and they were certainly worth the read.That said, the question remains, without the detail and extra characters,can the basic story of Lestat's re-awakening of the Queen of all vampiresbeentertaining and sufficient enough to sustain itself? While I can notanswer the question with a glowing appraisal, I will certainly admit thatitdid a decent job of combining all of the basic elements into a stand alonemovie. The fact that this movie can stand on it's own without any ties tothe prequel, Interview with the Vampire, is one of it's assets. You donotneed any fore-knowledge of the characters, books, or prequel movie inorderto watch this.Even though it fits into it's own little package does not mean it waspackedvery well. There were some plot holes, some of which could have beenfilledby simply restoring the "Ancients" scenes that were on the dvd. Iunderstand, as the dvd points out, that they were left out because itintroduced another subplot and characters that would add unnecessaryconfusion. While I agree with their reasoning, I do think they shouldhavesomehow salvaged the scene so that while the introductions of the ancientswould have been left out, Maharet's few lines about Akasha's reign ofdestruction and the vampire's responsibility should have remained. Theywould have added a needed sense of urgency and motivation that would havemade the final confrontation with Akasha and the ancients a bit morereasonable and satisfying.The character of Jessie is supposed to be the human link for the viewer toempathize through as they are taken into the world of vampires. In somescenes, this works adequately, but on the whole, Jessie's motivations,whilethey are explained, seem kind of empty. I am not sure if I can fault theactress or script, but when the movie was over, I still felt ambivalentabout the character's experiences.There were other elements that were not as fleshed out as they could be.The paranormal Talamasca needed a bit more background about their vampiretracking as did the character of Maharet and her family tree. LikeJessie,they were given some explanation, but I think a couple more lines ofdialogue would have helped.As I mentioned, the movie did a decent job of the basic story, but massivechanges were made from the source material. Characters were droppedcompletely, or merged together, and huge sections of character historywereremoved. Most notably, Lestat's history is extremely compacted andrevised.Nonetheless, there are some things that remained that I thought were donepretty well. The character of Lestat in this picture is rebellious andreckless which is more true to the character than he was portrayed inInterview. Lestat's re-awakening and concert scenes were exactly like Ihadenvisioned when I originally read the book. The character of Akasha wasalso as I pictured and a very good casting choice.If you are a fan of the books, and you need the twins, Gabriel, Magnus,andcrew, you are going to have difficulty sitting through this. If, on theother hand, you can set that aside and view this as a vampire movie ofit'sown, unrelated to the chronicles, you will probably enjoy this for thestand-alone vampire flick that it is.In summary, worth the rental.

Sal Pitore

(2012-04-25 04:06:52)

Queen of the Calvin Kleinites (still queen of the damned)

The movie is more about style (if you can call it that) than substance. Itfrequently has contemporary "hip mtv" soundtrack tunes blaring in thebackground while showing pretty boy Stuart Townsend prancing aroundhalf-naked as Lestat. I can guarantee you, if you liked Interview with theVampire, you will HATE this movie. They are total opposites in everyfacet.Interview was a serious attempt while this movie is nothing more than anattempt to draw in the under 25 crowd. The movie has no redeeming artisticcontributions. It's a glorified Calvin Klein ad, plain and simple.Avoid.

(2012-04-24 21:46:11)

Meh, not great, but not horrendous

I must say that I went into this movie with mediocre expectations. Havingheard the rumor that the film was almost scheduled for video release only,Idoubted that it would be winning any Oscars. However, while I wasn't blownaway, I can't say that it wasn't enjoyable. There was eye candy in StuartTownsend and Aaliyah, some kick-ass music, and a middling story line. Iwasdisappointed and misled, because I thought Aaliyah would have a largerrole,but that couldn't be avoided. Some of the lines caught me halfway betweenacringe and a laugh. I have to give some of the actors respect for beingableto say them without wincing. And, of course, as any true fan of Farscape (asci-fi TV show) I wanted to see the radiant Claudia Black on screen moreoften. But overall It was a decent movie that is just something to pop inthe VCR and kill 2 hours with. Switch off your brain, keep your eyes andears open and have some mindless fun.

mm-39

(2012-04-11 23:20:33)

New Wave and stylish.

This film reminds me of the early 80's New Wave infusion. One can see howPunk evolved into 2 high breds of Heavy Metal and New Wave. This filmreminds me of the '83 film "The Hunger" with David Bowie. It has thegrainy, blue light film quality with most of it being filmed in the dark.The synthesizer music and the character Marius looks like the singer ofHuman league; dresses simular to the guy in the video. The cool Lt Cosello(Miami vice) acting style is done in true 80's fashion. The concert, withthe flames in it, reminded me of Blade Runner. A lot of style, but allvampire films become redundant. I give it an 8 for style, and originality a4. If I was younger, say 14, I would give this an 8, but as I march into my30's I give it a 4 or 5 because second time around I seen thisbefore.

rokcomx

(2012-04-11 04:04:03)

Surprising and a bit vexing, but still worth a look-see

Queen of the Damned surprised me. It's got a lot of flaws - it's nevera good sign when the deleted scenes and DVD commentary are moreenjoyable than the stand-alone film - but it's not at all a horriblemovie. It messed with and compressed/redid the Anne Rice novels so muchthat few people seem to like it - but I think if you go into withoutexpecting it to be Anne Rice's Lestat, but rather a story loosely"inspired by" her books, it's a decent little goth movie.Particularly Queen/Damned's music, by guys from Korn, Static X and evenMarilyn Manson (who has one great album, Mechanical Animals, his ZiggyStardust glam tribute/ripoff), and Stuart Townsend as Lestat. While noTom Cruise, he's a lot better than you'd expect, and certainlybelievable as a rock star.As surprisingly dynamic as Cruise was in Interview/Vampire, there's noWAY he could have done the rock star turn without making everyone laughwhile remembering the tightie whitey dance from Risky Business!

(2012-04-04 08:17:49)

The Movie is Never as Good as the Book...

Like many of Aaliyah fans who already knew of her mysterious dark side, if anyone is familiar with Ancient Egyptian Solar Deities, Aaliyah's "other side" is personified in Queen of the Damned. Akasha is Sekhmet whose essence is fire, she is the dark side of Het-Heru. Aaliyah's nature is intrinsically Ancient Egyptian philosophy. Het Hert(Aaliyah) is the loving goddess of music, dance, beauty, and pleasure while her dark side is Sekhmet or Nesert, the flame who is a ferocious killer that annihilates the wicked on earth who lost respect for thier creator and became so self-absorbed and self-indulgent they believed they were gods on earth. Sekhmet is the vengeful Eye Of Ra who slithers towards her pray before she attacks. Sekhmet was crowned with a Solar disc and all whom she saw she slew, rejoicing in slaughter and the taste of blood. I enjoyed Queen of the Damned because it was simply an entertianing film which the soundtrack plays an integral part of your enjoyment of the film as a whole. Though Aaliyah's first destructive scene-when she makes her entrance at "The Club" is worth the price of you owning a DVD copy. Some Aaliyah fans complained because she was only in the film for a fraction-but for me, as a fan from the inception of her career, that made her scenes all the more poignant.

(2012-04-03 18:58:58)

Do you like vampire movies?

Here's the rub: If you like vampire movies, watch it. If you don't, don't watch it. I watched this movie, all the way through and was confused as heck as to what was going on! I then watched the deleted scenes on the DVD.The fools! They should have left the deleted scenes in! When "The Ancients" showed up I had no idea who they were. Here's the deal. The gentleman they had play Lestat was actually quite good. He is no Tom Hanks or a Tom Cruise for that matter, but he did a serviceable job. He was believable. The young deceased singer who played the queen of the damned did fairly well too...the problem? The plot stank! It was so cut up and incongruous that it was nearly impossible to follow! The problem was, they followed Anne Rice's book probably a little too close. If you want to know how one of her books reads, then by gum, watch this train wreck. Or you could watch a good vamp movie like Lost Boys, or heck even Blade!

wellsd

(2012-03-28 01:53:38)

Waste of time

Where do you begin when you talk about a movie this bad? First of all if you are an Anne Rice fan avoid this movie at all costs. Theynot only destroyed "Queen of the Dammed" but also many other ofher novels through misinformation and poor casting. Lestat iscast a brown haired dark eyed man. This is hard to accept for avain vampire who constantly brags about his blonde hair and blueeyes. Many of the scenes in the movie never occur in the book andvice versa many of the scenes in the book never make it into thefilm. The action of the film actually combines part of another AnneRice novel "The Vampire Lestat". The movie's only saving gracewas an abundance of stunning visual effects, however, amultimillion dollar effects budget can't save a film thisbad.Anne Rice: I'm sorry your work was destroyed by Hollywood.

Zoecb

(2012-03-27 13:30:16)

Good movie, bad adaptation

Music perfect. Cast good. Style good. Plot - drivel.If the book hadn't been written, it would be a very crediblefilm.If you have read the book and find it difficult to accept changes you'llnever be open-minded enough to like it.The plot has been changed far too much, for reasons that aren't reallygoodenough to be forgiven.The book is such a mix of many different plots and ideas, they couldn'tallbe included.Akasha's character is not developed enough and the exclusion of Mekaredoesn't really work, however hard they have tried.However, the one theme it does focus on it brings out superbly: the"Lestatthe rock-star" idea. Stuart Townsend is perfectly cast for this (as forhaving the wrong hair colour, just get over it) and the Jonathan Davis hasdone a fantastic job with both the source music and his first ever filmscore. Stuart Townsend's incarnation of Lestat the rock God isenthralling,sexy and magnetic, which saves this film.Aliyah's Akasha was brilliant - for such a young actress she embodied a400year old Egyptian Queen remarkably. Shame we won't get to see her in otherroles. She has left behind such indications of potential.If you're not too much of an Anne Rice fundamentalist, and you can put thebooks behind you, you can enjoy this film. When it is good, it is veryverygood. If you dwell on the bad, you'll hate it.

(2012-03-19 17:00:54)

Why say its "bad" when you could look at both differantly!

Fans of the book were fairly dissappointed with the adaptation of the newest Vampire Chronical movie, "Queen of the Damned". Its like the book to Jurassic Park(you got to admit the book and the movie were very differant ,but both were great). You got to look at both things differantly. Still I did enjoy "Queen" and was a great challenge for Aaliyah, but she doesn't appear till an hour into the movie(So why have her the lead!). I didn't like the movie because it was Aaliyah last(very bold and rude of you Cellis 1036!),but how steady the pace of the movie was and the acting in this. This movie does become slow till thirty minutes in to it you do get envolved with the plot line. Aaliyah was excellent(they showcased her brillantly). Stuart Townsend wasn't bad at all(,but you still wish Brad Pitt was in this!). What can I say, its a great rental! Sorry to the fans of the book for having high hopes ,but its only a movie and Hollywood will alter things in order to make it differant (Birdman of Alcatraz for example).Bottom Line is fans of the book will be disappointed ,but people who didn't read it would like it better than the book fans.

marilynramon90

(2012-03-19 06:07:30)

great movie

this movie was awesome, although it didn't really stick to anne rice'schronicles it was still good. my favorite actor in the movie was StuartTownsend, he did a terrific job with the character Lestat. if you werereally into this movie you could buy the soundtrack, i did. it has alot of amazing artists and songs from the movie such as marilyn manson,dead cell, disturbed, korn, etc. if you haven't seen this movie, youshould really check it out. its right up there with bromstoker'sDracula and interview with a vampire if you're into vamp flicks!! it'serotic, Gothic, and bloody. it has a good romance story tied into it aswell. when the beauty and wonder of the 19th century french meetsmodern rock you just cant go wrong!

(2012-03-17 14:04:08)

Good movie, but not as good as the book.

Being a Vampire Chronicles fan as well as a Korn fan made this movie awesome for me. Yes, the book has more detail, characters, and story line. But for those people that never read any of the books it is entertaining and easy to understand. Hearing Jonathan Davis's voice blaring when Lestat sang gave me chills. The soundtrack has the same songs, but sung by different people. Trust me it is good. The different people include Wayne Static, Marilyn Manson, Chester from Linkin Park, and Jay from Orgy. I pre-ordered the dvd and can't wait to see it and crank it up!

(2012-03-17 09:29:29)

Absolutely Fantastic

The first time I saw the trailers for this movie, I knew that I had to go see it. When I did, the only thing i was disappointed with was that it was over and I had to go home. And I am glad to see that someone else feels that Stuart Townsend is a better Lestat than Tom Cruise. I strongly urge anyone who is a fan of Vampire movies to either rent or buy this one. You will not be disappointed unless you were expecting to see an exact reproduction of the book in live action.

bunni_babby

(2012-03-08 20:30:27)

Loved it!!!

***May Contain Spoilers*** OK, it wasn't exactly as good as expected infact it was a lot different than I had thought it would be but it stillturned out to be a pretty good movie.I usually don't care too much for that type of music but in this movieit worked perfectly (I mean duh he's a rock star) but anyway I lovedStuart Townsend in this, and Aaliyah, although she had a small part inthe movie was amazing.And even though Tom Cruise played Lestat in the Interview with aVampire, I have to admit that I am glad he turned down the role eventhough I normally hate when they use different people to play the samecharacters in like sequels and stuff.Overall, the movie was great and I enjoyed watching it, even if therewere parts that could have been better. Great vampire movie.

bregund

(2012-03-08 13:45:45)

Pretty damned stupid

This movie is about as enjoyable as an audit. The characters are soflat, there is absolutely no substance to them at all. When Lestat'sgigantic smirking face appears on the jumbo-tron, it's all so damnedstupid and contrived. There just wouldn't be eight hundred reportersall standing around firing questions at the vampires, the very idea islame, like an unfunny Saturday Night Live skit that no one laughs at.The dialogue is so flat and smarmy, like it was written by afourteen-year-old girl (but that's how Rice writes, or so I'm told).Akasha sways through the movie like she has deteriorated motor skills;instead of making her sexy and mysterious, it makes her look like sheneeds physical therapy. And that hissing would get on anyone's nerves.Most of the time, Stewart Townsend just stands there like a male model,staring blankly at the other characters without a single thought goingthrough his empty head, or so one would gather by his deadpanexpressions. Who would ever think that a vampire movie could be boring?Even John Carpenter's otherwise awful "Vampires" kept the actionmoving. This movie is slow, dull, and stupid.

Dalmas

(2012-03-06 09:07:31)

Original story

Vampire Lestat joins rock band. Band becomes famous. Pretty girl workingatthe British "Center for Paranormal Studies" gets interested. Reads Lestatsjournal. Finds out that he once made a statue come to life by playingviolinto it, and also drank some blood from it. Girl meets Lestat at thetraditional vampire hangout in London. Girl and Lestat become friends.Girlgoes to concert. More vampires show up. Other vampires don't like thatLestat has a band. Some fighting.As bad as it sounds?Definitely.2 out of 10.

(2012-03-06 00:21:26)

really sucks

OK, I knew that this movie would not be exactly the story from the books, nevertheless I was very excited and curious to see how it would be done. After watching about an hour of this movie, I had to shut it off before I started throwing things at the TV! I knew that important parts of the book would have to be left out of the movie, however I did not expect those parts to be replaced with NONSENSE. Having Marius make Lestat and teach him about the world seriously takes away from Lestat's character. The fact that Lestat had to learn about his vampire senses and powers on his own is part of who he is. Also I just can't believe Lestat would be the type to spend hours playing the violin just because he saw some girl playing it. And Jesse-WHAT??? In the book she was a strong, intelligent woman, in this movie she was reduced to a childish obsessed fan. I might not have hated this movie quite so much if I had not read the books, however I still don't think I would have given it another star.