I've heard rumors that there will be another film, and i was wondering who do you think should play Lestat?

I think Tom Cruise is way to old. If the script is better then i think Stuart Townsend would be good. Any other actors you know that would fit the bill?

There has been rumores of Downsy Jr paying Lestat, and so far everyone(fans) has said no, but Anne Rice likes him, I'm not sure if this makes it ok or worse. I don't feel anry, or disapointed, I think I just feel sad. I expected of all people to understand the arguements that the fans had against and Townsend that Anne would understand the most, not agree you must understand, but she would achknowladge the arguements of both sides. I know that Lestat is her character, and he is she, she is he, and he came from her mind, so whoever she says is Lestat, therefor is Lestat. But to me Downsey Jr is just so far from what I see Lestat as. What does Anne see in him? (this isn't rhetorical, if you know why Anne see's Downsey Jr as Lestat please tell me, it may help me to see and understand things from her POV)

I think it would only be fair to offer the part to Townsend, give him a chance to truly play Lestat. His attitude, the way he speaks the way he moves is Lestat, and even though he doesn't look like Lestat, he does look very young. And he looks more like Lestat that Downsy Jr.

I have said before, that I would prefer a Lestat that acted like Lestat, that a Lestat that only looks like Lestat. And to me Downsy Jr neither looks or acts like Lestat.

If you want to know on what basis I have been judging the characters please go to my comment on the pick "did you see Stuard Townsends potential as Lestat".

If we are to look at Lestat's looks, then this is what I expect;

-blonde shoulder-length curly hair (more of a straw colour that yellow as this is how its described in most of the books)
-blue eyes
-pale (unless they are filming Tale of the Body Theif)
-handsome, but not just any old handsome, something that is congruent with the way he is described in the book
-muscular, but not overly padded like Downsey Jr, but maybe something a little more that Townsend.

Ok so now personality, erm this will take a bit of thinking, and the best of my thinking happens right before I sleep (this is why theres a notpad always next to my bed), so this part of my comment will be updated =D

I think Townsend, or the script for Queen of the Damned, has one angle of Lestat's personality correct, the part that is narsasictic, child-like chekiness, the arrogance, and evilness.

Cruise, or the script for Interview with the Vampire, has another part of Lestat's character right, his impatience, his tenacity.

The truth is, Lestat is a vampire and so, as described by Anne Rice, is " out of nature", annd is so deep, so much more complicated than any human is or could be, and this will be, and is so hard to protray in a film.

I personally haven't even cared to think about other options besides Townsend again. 'Cause I really, really loved the way he highlighted and portrayed those parts of Lestat and I really, really wish he would be given his fair chance to portray the entire character, or rather, whatever of him can be adapted in a film while truly in efforts to adapt him...

I so think it would be fair that he was offered the role again for truer version of Lestat. Because Cruise too was offered the part again even though the one he had portrayed in his time, was totally different from what the then offered was. So, Townsend's case isn't any different. His misfortune just is that the version he got to play in the first place, is horribly and disrespectufully written. But nevertheless, just different from whatever the newest adaptation would be.

So, I'm not really interested in thinking options. I'm just interested in seeing who wins the honour to play the part (supposing it is this time well written.)

And of course I'm interested in if that guy really has been Anne's suggestion and if so, why. I have now asked that from her by e-mail. I felt it ok since I had already wasted her time by asking who does she think should/could play the roles of Lestat & Marius in a film adaptation and that wasn't so long ago. Actually I think it was a week or two ago - not that she thought it was a waste of her time as she thanked for asking after repliying that she can't decide out of her many favorites and is anyway more interested in seeing who will get the parts than stating her own opinions. So I felt like it was pretty much obvious I would wish to know if this rumour is just a rumour or true. :D This time I also asked her if she would name few of those of her favorites for the parts.

If she chooses to reply to any of this, I will let you know on this topic. (:

WOOP!WOOP! I hope she replies, I realy want to know why she likes him (RD Jr), and who else she would like as Lestat.

I don't think its a rumor, as it was published in a magazine, and quoted in an online article.

folow this link;

link


Anne says faily clearly that she likes his as an actor, and gives a few reasons why she would like to see himas Lestat.

Yes, that site was correct.
Anne's reply to my e-mail (which I sent like less than an hour ago!)

"Thank you for your letter. I did not in fact suggest anyone for the role of Lestat. I read the rumour on the internet that Robert Downey Jr. had been in "close talks" to play the role, and though I cannot confirm or deny this rumour, and have nothing to officially announce yet, I did post on several sites that I think the world of Robert Downey Jr., and feel he would be a magnificent Lestat. This has to do with his huge acting talent, his versatility, and his particularly charming and charismatic personality. It seems to me that this actor has the wit, the gleam in his eye, the depth to be a wonderful Lestat; I feel it would be very good for the books and for future films, if Robert Downey Jr. did take the part. ------ I don't want to speculate on other actors. ---- When a film is sold to a Hollywood producers many factors come into play; the actors chosen for various parts have to be interested, available, good performers, and so forth and so on. So the choices made by the producers evolve for certain reasons. And I can't really anticipate those reasons. I don't know enough about who is available, who is bankable, who wants to do it, who is good to work with, who is not, etc. ---- So I wait to hear what is on the horizon. I wait to hear the real possibilities. I don't want to indulge in pipe dreams or false hopes. ---- I am happy to do that, to wait until some real options are offered. ----- I am very optimistic that we will see very high quality films with Lestat. And this gives me comfort. I thank you for your letter and I hope this explanation of things makes sense to you. Take care and again thanks. Anne Rice."

Ok. Yes, that makes sense and I don't have an opinion on the dude as an actor 'cause I don't think I've seen him in any film, not to mention in many. And I have agood faith in that if Anne Rice thinks so, should he get the part, he will most likely make a fabulous Lestat.

I would just have to live with the fact he looks way too old and goddamnit it would bother me to no end. But probably wouldn't take too much away from my film enjoyment 'cause Cruise doesn't either. He plays that version of Lestat extremely well so I almost forget about how old he looks and can enjoy the film.

What I am more worried of is my fan video projects. I plan to combine the QOTD film and the new film in Lestat & Marius case and if the Lestat looks 20 years older than Townsend it will look very stupid. But chances are that Marius will look extremely different too. But if even Lestat looked enough alike to Townsend who I think is very well close enough for Lestat's look, it would look less stupid.

I shoul dnot think of the possibility of another middle age face in Lestat's part. It pains me. Looks really don't matter most but as I've said in Lestat's case they are significant when it comes to the age looks. But, whoever will take the part, the most important thing is that they play the personality and all that stuff well. Maybe possible too old looks can be toned down by make up and tricks and that stuff... I understand they do that a lot in film art. WHy they didn't do that in 1994, I don't know. Maybe it wasn't possible back then?

The reply Anne gave you makes me feel a lot better. I have faith in Anne that Downsey would make a good Lestat, but as she clearly states its up to the producors, and I'm not so sure I have as much faith in them to get Lestat right. But I'm sure I'll love the film none the less.

I'm sure with make up, wigs , contact lenses and CGI they could make anyone look like Lestat.

The answer I really want to know is when will they film, and rleease this film, which book will they be adapting?

Does anybody know?

I don't think anyone knows since even Anne doesn't know. As she said there "I don't have anything to officially announce yet". Plus, she replied to me at earlier point when I asked which book it would base on, she said "It will probably base on the content in The Vampire Lestat." So, I assume that is what she's been told but it isn't too certain yet.

Personally I think the only right and smart way to film - especially if this was to be a film serie but even if just one film - is to film The Vampire Lestat first.

Any of the later films alone would confuse those who don't know the books. Even though "the Body Thief" has no practical connection to the earlier books' events, it still includes relationships and attitudes that origin to the earlier parts. If they make a high quality film based on "the Body Thief" but not first on The Vampire Lestat, it will leave open questions such as why does Marius's decision to not help Lestat affect Lestat emotionally so deeply and why does Lestat in the first place, so deeply yearn to be a mortal again. Of course these things can and hopefully would be explained in ddialogs somehow... but still it is not even nearly the same as to portray them in an independent high quality film. Choosing not to film Lestat's mortal life and his first years as a vampire first, is curcial decision ESPECIALLY now that the audience has been poisoned with the f-cking QOTD film's visions.

And anyway, it's not only that filming TVL first would make more sense and be more serving to the fandom, but it's Lestat!! He has to be and deserves to be taken into a film art from the very beginning of his life and not just one thing from here and another from there, randomly. :/

PS. I sure hope it isn't another IWTV. We don't need another IWTV. The IWTV is perfect enough.

"Any of the later films alone would confuse those who don't know the books"
-I agree

I don't think people who havn't read the books would understand why Louis refuses to help, because that is such a sagnificant scene in the book, it affects Lestat greatly, and Marius' reaction.

There's halusinations abotu Claudia as well, if you'd watched Interview you would understand, but I don't think it would be quite as important as if you'd read Interview.

I think I had some questions about the halusinations about Claudia in a different forum but I can't remember them now.

I also want to say, I'm amazed at how quickly Anne Rice replied to you, not even my friends reply to me that quickly!

I had some other points but half way through this comment I left to put a pizza in the oven and now their gone, they will probably retun to me tonight.

I wonder if they will turn it into a series of films, and if so do you think they will remake QOTD?

If they indeed have begun with the attitude "Let's make a high quality film of The Vampire Chronicles!" as Anne seems to believe they have, and should it be a film serie... Then in that case, yes, I believe they will remake QOTD.

They would have no choice.

The current QOTD isn't serving them in any way. Being clearly one of the most direspective and disgracing film adaptations of a book in the entire history of from-book-to-film art. At least it should be.

Either way, I look forword to the films with optamistic sceptacism.

And I hope these films will show to some what real vampires are, and what interesting characters look and act like.

Yes, and then they should brainwash SM with them, make her watch them the way they do to the dude in "A Clockwotrk Orange".

:P I'm not sure if I really meant that for real but it sure is pleasent to imagine.

Haha it certainly is a pleasant image. But I think SM lacks the emosion, knowladge and the brain to understand them thoroughly.

I've been debating about should Lestat look around 20sh or older.

"The aging process in the eighteenth century was faster than it is today. The life expectancy was twenty to thirty years younger than it is now. That means Lestat would have looked like the modern thirty or so as opposed to the modern twenty. It's scientific fact that the aging process has slowed int he last few centuries. Both Tom Cruise and Townsend were technically too young if you were to go by the standards of twenty as according to the eighteenth century."

I argud that and they were able to make half of my arguments fall whereas they completely ignored these:

And you made it sound like every single human being would age the same pace. Then as now - it also depends on an individual's hormones and also their life. Aging, just like gaining weight, is an individual matter. It's not the same with everyone. And some, who have hard life, age faster than others who have a hard life yet look very young.

To those they said absolutely nothing as if I never said them.
I also said:

So, unless Anne Rice has described Lestat to look much older than the modern day 21 years old does - which I don't recall she has - I wouldn't say that either of the actors was too young for Lestat in looks.

"She never once said he looked like the modern twenty-year-old."

So, don't we pretty much have a tie here? Especially with my arguments which they chose to ignore?

Well, after saying that, they said this:

"In fact I've just cornered you!

Ha! Go to her site. Read her statement about Robert Downey Jr. playing Lestat. SHE, herself, uses the explanation that physically he's closer to how Lestat would have appeared because of aging in the eighteenth century. That was her rebuttal to people saying RDJ was too old. Anne Rice, herself, said Lestat isn't twenty by the modern typical twenty.

Check and mate."

"Some are saying he is too old to play the part. This is absolutely not true. He is quite youthful. Besides, Lestat is a man when he is made into a vampire. A twenty year old man in the 18th century is the equivalent of an older man today. Age just shouldn't be an issue here, not with an actor of this scope and charisma. — I’m thrilled at the prospect that this rumor might be true." "

link rt-downey-jr-for-lestat.html

EDIT:// I have come to see I had phrased my words wrong, in confusion. I used to say Anne hasn't make Lestat's age looks official while of course she has. In her statement about RDJ. I made a mistake in confusion while just trying to make my point that even though she's stated her image of Lestat's age looks, she doesn't say we MUST think the same way, but that she brought it up just so people wouldn't make an issue about actors's age.

So I guess I should stop making an issue out of Cruise's age looks. :D

But I'm pretty sure my debate buddy isn't willing to give room to the possibility that Lestat could still look around 20sh as well. Seeing to the drama they pulled out of my differing views and preferences for Lestat's looks, they would've probably torched me alive and spat on my remains if we weren't communicting through the internet.

Personally I see it making sense that Lestat should look older, they do age quicker in the past, and Lestat did have a pretty hard life untill he got to Paris.

But I'm use to thinking of him as a modern day 20 yr old so it would just be wrong for me to see an oldish actor as Lestat. I watched Interview the other day and Tom Cruise just looked so weired as Lestat. His eyes are too far apart, and his nose is crooked and he's just not clean good looking enough to be Lestat.

But then again my brother is nearly 20 but he looks way younger. So it does depend on the person, I guess.

As long as Lestat is blonde blue eyed, and most importantly can act like Lestat (even if its only like 40% coz Lestat is had ot be able to get him fully) then I don't mind. And as long as he doesn't look 40 odd I'm ok.


But I trust Anne, so if she says RDJ can do it, then he could be Lestat.

"But I trust Anne, so if she says RDJ can do it, then he could be Lestat."

Me too.

And I see it makes sense Lestat could look older but as I said it is not just the hard life but the hormones and all that stuff as well, just as individually as gaining weight. It would be just as possible for Lestat to have remained 20-ish looking back then as it is now.

EDIT:// I have come to see I had phrased my words wrong, in confusion. I used to say Anne hasn't make Lestat's age looks official while of course she has. In her statement about RDJ. I made a mistake in confusion while just trying to make my point that even though she's stated her image of Lestat's age looks, she doesn't say we MUST think the same way, but that she brought it up just so people wouldn't make an issue about actors's age. So, I have now edited the following text into more sensible and logic state. Abd si if Myf's reply seems partly illogic rtoo it's only because mine was that first.

I see it makes sense Lestat could look older and my issue about Cruise's old looks just got a whole lot smaller - but... I can still see Lestat perfectly logically look like 20-ish year old as well. As it is not just the hard life but the hormones and all that stuff as well, just as individually as gaining weight. I'm 25 yet i look like 16 years old. I eat fattening stuff every day and I don't do sports or anything yet I am almost underwight. It would be just as possible for Lestat to have remained 20-ish looking back then as it is for people of modern days.

So I honestly do not see Anne Rice saying in any of those comments that Lestat must look old. But this is not because I can't imagine him old. And I have already said I'm now more ok with Cruise's looks.

Anne didn't bring up the 18th century aging in the first place when Lestat's age was asked about. Hence, the FAQ answer of hers from 2001. And this was an answer long after Tom Cruise's looks had been made into a problem since 1994. Don't you think that if she meant for Lestat to absolutely look older, she would've brought that historical thing up already in that FAQ answer. And so she didn't bring that up because of Tom Cruise either. ...in her RDJ statement, I believe she's not saying Lestat must look older even though it apparently is her image of the character - but that it's a possibility - so that people would stop making an issue out of it. If she thought Lestat must look old she would've made it very official by saying so in Lestat's narration in the books. But as far as I recall, she doesn't. So officially - whatever she herself thinks Lestat looks of age - she's left Lestat's age looks up to the reader's vision and is now only trying to calm us down by saying it shouldn't be an issue because it's possible Lestat could look older because of the 18th century aging progress standards.

Am I not making sense?

I get ya. When it come to Anne, whether she's reply to someone, making a statement or in her books, if she doesn't say it out right and clear, then it isn't what she means.

At the end of the day Lestat is a fictional character, the only thing we have certain from books is his personality, his looks are up to your imagination, so the films and actors are never gunna please everyone looks-wise.

And from what Anne says she doesn't say he necessarily looks old or young, but he could look either way. What is a cert is that he acts youthful.

Amen.

I'm listening ot the director's/producor's commentary at the moment, and they make the point of it is far more important to have an actor who acts like the character than looks like the character.

They also point out that Brad Pitt doesn't look like Louis, neither does Antonio look like Armand, yet people don't kick up so much of a fuss about them.

Oh, they just explained about Marius' hair. Haha, and I'm trying to invision Stuart and Vincent with blonde wigs on, cause they did try it out.

It seems, acording to them, that they left a lot out because they "idn't want ot open that can of worms" which I guess is an ok reason, its quite complicated, if you bring in Jesse's psychic ability and other such shizzle,

"...and they make the point of it is far more important to have an actor who acts like the character than looks like the character."

Exactly and isn't that what Anne Rice too, is saying in both of those RDJ related statements of hers.... ;)

"They also point out that Brad Pitt doesn't look like Louis, neither does Antonio look like Armand, yet people don't kick up so much of a fuss about them."

Hahaa. Indeed! So it kinda proves they are not looking at things really and are not thinking straight, which kinda is taking away from the validness of their opinions.

"Oh, they just explained about Marius' hair. Haha, and I'm trying to invision Stuart and Vincent with blonde wigs on, cause they did try it out."

I have seen Vincent with a long hair that was brown / light brown, I don't agree he'd look that unattractive in a long blonde hair. Of course it's different to actually see it than try to imagine it. And as for Stuart... he wasn't wearing a wig in the film, was he? His hair was that length and curly as it is and so they could've ditch the wig idea and just dyed his hair. But as I've said before - it shouldn't matter in this film's case since the maker isn't Magnus in it and so the hair colour isn't significant.

"It seems, acording to them, that they left a lot out because they "didn't want ot open that can of worms" which I guess is an ok reason, its quite complicated, if you bring in Jesse's psychic ability and other such shizzle,"

Buuuullshiiiiit, I still say. They begun the whole damned project with writing a Lestat&Jesse fanfiction story in a movie script format. The original script is even more about Lestat&Jesse than the film itself. They left so much out because they didn't want to adapt the books at any point but write their own story in which name they distorted everything they did borrow from the books. THERE. GRRRR. They can not convince me with any lame excuses of "limited minutes", "information over-load" and "complicated stuff" as long as they make the story about something that isn't in the books at all!

I can still see why they did it, the mas population love a human-vampire love story *caughTwilightcagh* and so it would settle their yearning for a love story with a happily-ever-after ending. Personally, I think they should have consecrated more on the Lestat/Akasha love story, and I'm not saying I agree with the Lestat/Jesse story line, I can just understand why it could help sell the movie.

Yeah I know. But they didn't exactly seem to care about that since the tarilers don't refer to the Lestat&Jesse thing in any way and I'm not sure does even the DVD back cover?

They completely market the film as if it was a more accurate adaptation of Anne Rice's book(s) and not as a vampire/mortal love story. So I guess they just trusted that after people who are blind enough to think there actually is a love story romance, which there isn't, would talka about it and praise it and so it would help the movie to sell...

Oh, in any case they're just bleeding imbeciles who do not know what they're doing or even what they want not to mention how to get what they want.

Wasn't the film a flop after all? As in the money they got didn't cover the money they spent for the production?

I dunno, probably, not a lot of people know about the film, or at least not a lot of people have seen the film. The film makers seem to be clueless.

What I find funny is that the music for the menu on the DVD sounds nothing like the actual film.

Listening to the commentary, they asked each other a lot what happened in the book, stuff like, what happened in the climax when Akahsa died. Its like they read the book once, just because they had to, to make the film. They seriously disregard the books. I bet the makers of the Harry Potter films know the books inside out, I know they still didn't make such a good adaptation of the books, but they at least probably read the boos more that once, and bothered to remember what actually happened in them. It just pissed me off a little.

Yeah and there's still the thing... that neither of the dudes on the commentary track was one of the script writers. ANd after all the script is what makes the film basically. And the script, for heaven's sake, the scriipt IS entirely and throughly something that COULD have been written without even glancing at the books. All they had to know is the characters's names and basic ideas of the plot which could've been quickly explained by one of those who had read the books.

From now on I'm guna watch Queen of the Damned as an independent film, not as an adaptation, because you could argue that the film isn't an adaptation of any book, its so off the plot. And when I don't make comparisons I think its a good and enjoyable film.