The Queen Of The Damned
June 11th 2009 02:17
Theres a book, theres a movie, theres a controversy.
I read the book before I saw the movie, which is the natural order of things most of the time. I got angry before the movie was even released, for one reason only - Aaliyah as Akasha.
On seeing the movie I had a lot more to get angry about, but I found, in the end, I really just couldnt. The movie was extremely beautiful. Stuart Townsend played a mean Lestat. The music was incredible. And my major reason for being angry in the first place was eclipsed, struck dead into non existance, by Aaliyah's magnificent performance of the ancient queen.
The book really needs to be read and taken all on its own and the movie thrown into the 'hollywood screwed up the story' basket. Theres a lot of that. I'd like to comment a little on the book before I get into the movie, what was forgiveable, and what wasnt.
The book continues the story of Lestat, whom fans will always love. Despite being chronological in the series of 'The Vampire Chronicles' I strongly urge anyone who hasnt read it to grab a copy and read it. This is not just a vampire story, as so many of Rice's novels prove. This is a story that manages to raise humungoes issues and discuss them - The influence of the supernatural upon the natural. The family of humanity and what it has become. True representations of ancient society and how our historians often get it wrong. Most importantly to me, this book deals with religion - loving God, Hating him, or not believing in him at all, and this effect on society, and, the all important theme of the never ending war between the sexes.
First - Supernatural and its influence on the natural. Anne Rice hints heavily that humanity should, on the whole, strive for its own existance without the help of the spiritual. That ghosts, spirits, spells and witches have outlived their usefulness, and must be discarded if humanity is to move to a higher state of being. Despite my own love and belief in the supernatural, this may well be true. This is illustrated by the vampires frequently saying that they bring humanity pain, they hold them back, and thus must be left out of the equation.
To me, it raises a deeper understanding. If witches, ghosts and vampires can be harnessed in a significant way then it may well serve to elevate humanity. If we can rid ourselves of bigotries, open our minds fully and link spirituality to science in a correct way, this may well be the new path.
The family of humanity. Maharet is the mother of a single child in the region of Egypt. Within 5000 years (or so) the bloodline of that child has spread into every country and Maharet keeps track of them all, no matter what race they have become. A beautiful illustration of the fact that humanity has 'interbred' to such an extent that there really is very little division between the races, and her 'Great Family' is indeed, all of humanity. This is illustrated by the young Jesse, who visits all aspects of the family and finds herself at home no matter what part of the world she has come to.
True representations of ancient society. Maharet mentions small things to Jesse throughout the book. Such as, societies grew hallucinegenic herbs for years before someone thought to plant a weat crop. People may keep records for storage years before someone writes a poem. These tiny yet very specific things need to be taken into account in any historical study. So often, we forget to put actual humanity into our historical figures. Historians and archaelogists may scratch their heads for years over 'why they did this' or 'how they did that' when it may be as simple as the human solution - they didnt feel like walking there. You get me?
Religion. Anne Rice was, like me, raised a catholic and once out of the influence of the church sought many answers of her own. This shines through in every book. God and the church is there, heavily, but there is a strong sense of if God is loving, why would he send basically good people to hell for one tiny thing? Anne Rice used the example of kissing her soon to be husband out of wedlock. Throughout the book the issues of religion are dealt with by Akasha herself - she has seen all religions come and go in her time, and what are they to her? She says humans are little more than animals, as she has seen it directly demonstrated over thousands of years that humanity takes to each new religion without seeking its further depth. One of my favourite parts is where Lestat asks her, dont you care about God? Worry that he will stop you? Akasha answers that there is no God but herself. She has listened to humanitys prayers for centuries, and no God has come. Save her. Now theres a gal I can get behind.
Lestat and the other vampires try to impress upon Akasha that her 'miracles' will not stun the western world. She was instantly worshipped in the smaller, more primitive regions, but they explain that in the western word of science, she will not hold up, in ideal or in miracles. She cannot heal, only kill (although this is not strictly true - vampiric blood can heal small wounds without making a vampire, and a vampire can always be made, turning human into saint in Akashas religion) and her principles will not be swallowed. I tend to disagree. It is the western woprd that seeks the answers with a greater thirst, that seeks to disprove the existance of God almost as if that might cause him to show himself, therefore, I truly think if a beautiful, shining woman were to appear and offer answers, perform miracles and demonstrate her strength (Akasha has telepathic power and hearing sufficient to listen to the other side of the globe. A clap of her hands could destroy buildings and she would be impervious to all our weapons - including nuclear blast) the western world would fall at her feet in apology.
The one flaw is her therim, and that leads me to the ageless battle of the sexes. Akasha proposes to create a new Eden, a garden of peace where humanity may flower. She does not seek to destroy humanity, she seeks to save it from itself. Her solution is to kill all male humans, leaving only one out of a hundred. She believes this will see and end to violence, to war, to rape, to crime. She speaks of how the weaker sex has always been at mans mercy and if they could be given a chance, the women would create the garden. She is convincing - particularly when talking about the future to come, when males will be allowed back into society, trying to explain to them, the horrific now of roving packs of males intent on rape and murder, talking of peace and children playing in the streets without fear. Furthermore, she suggests it as a fitting punishment for men, after the years of oppresion they have given women, the hundreds of aborted females so that a male might be chosen instead, and whole societies based upon the strength of male and how it is preferable.
If Akasha were to skew her theology just slightly, then even the western world would follow her. It is Maharet that points out, not all women are peaceful creatures, if you were to succeed, women would war, and to find out that Akasha could bestow eternal life and powers such as she herself posses', I believe, in that instance, the women would turn on her faster than the men. Chaos would ensue. As she says, 'even women would kill for that'.
Another flaw in the theology is brought up by Lestat - 'Dont you think women will fight for their men?' In the primitive cultures where they have been literally opressed, no, they did not. But in our western world, would we fight for our husbands, our brothers, our sons? You betcha. I would certainly fight for my man to be the blessed one in a hundred to survive. And I dont think I could accept the Goddess who killed him, no matter how long Ive waited for one such as her. Also, the bloodyness of her reign, how she intends to take her throne, would never be forgotten. She calls it a 'cleansing'......But so did Hitler.
Kman always brings up the point that men would fight her, armies would march forth against her. This is one perfect beauty in her plan - they could do nothing against her. Kman says, oh, modern weapons, modern soldiers, unstoppable....Akasha may be immobile during daylight hours, but she is still invulnerable. While she slept in the day they could impale her set her on fire, put her in the sun - none of these things would kill her. Even if a blade could be found that could dismember her, the pieces would find each other, and put her back together. She cannot bleed to death, decapitation slows her down a little. The armies upon armies would die in their tracks, we could waste every nuclear weapon on her flesh, still, she would be standing, ready for more, while we were all dead. More importantly, with her telepathy and telekineses, she would never allow us to begin.
I would like any people who consider themselves intelligent enough to grasp these concepts to give the book a read and come back and discuss it with me. Kmans getting sick of hearing it.
Now for the movie.
The movie explores NONE of the above issues. I considered Aaliyah an unforgivable choice to play Akasha as physically, they are extremely different. However, Aaliyah managed to portray her so well, her every movement seems alien, yet natural, the way she speaks and moves is primitive, I cant imagine any actress doing a better job. The primitive nature of Akasha is mentioned again and again in he book - not just vampiric, and infected with spirit, but old, ancient. I can really believe the figure Im seeing is 5000 years old.
The mix ups of the characters and plot are disappionting, but expected, and, surprisingly, forgiveable, as the movie clicks along at its own pace. The visuals are stunning, sensual, erotic, offset by the magnificent soundtrack. I want it, but after hearing that the original singer was not able to sing on the soundtrack, now Im not so keen. Most of it being shot in Melbourne is a big plus, and I would never have expected and Australian director to manage a vampire movie so well. Theres a certain delicacy needed, before it goes off into the realms of hokey tongue in cheek, and this was done with grace.
I really cant get over them saying that Marius made Lestat. How hard would it have been to give us a five minute scene of Lestat being made by Magnus? Then you could have brought in Marius, same relationship if you like. Still, its easy to forget as the movie follows its own storyline.
I forgive them easily for omitting 'The Story of the Twins' its mammoth, huge, it takes up a whole part in the novel. However, in omitting the twins, they have taken out the urgancy in Akasha's death scene. As queen, if she dies, they all die. That is not explored. And really needs to be there so you can be on the edge of your seat at the end. Defeating her seems impossible, but even if they can, it is suicide. Full on, fellas!
The one thing, I cannot, ever forgive in this movie is Akasha's death scene. Since when does hollywood cop out of decapitation? Akasha is decapitated, and in this time, her hand tries to re attach her head to her body. Its a monumental scene. All the vampires are experiencing the same disorientation, and death pangs, all seems lost because, if Akasha cant re attach her head, they all die. If she does, they still have to stop her. Akasha's final death is decided by Maharet and Mekare - somehow, through disorientation they manage to get to Akasha, take her heart and brain (where the spirit of the vampire is thought to be) and Mekare devours them.
No matter how many times I read the book, I expect those pages to change, and Akasha to live.
And no matter how much I love the movie, I cannot forgive the lackluster final scene. Ok, omit the twins - how about a death match between Maharet and Akasha, and Maharet eats the heart and brain? That could have worked. Some reason even, for the barely impacting endng, would be useful.
So thats my take. Add it to the list.
I read the book before I saw the movie, which is the natural order of things most of the time. I got angry before the movie was even released, for one reason only - Aaliyah as Akasha.
On seeing the movie I had a lot more to get angry about, but I found, in the end, I really just couldnt. The movie was extremely beautiful. Stuart Townsend played a mean Lestat. The music was incredible. And my major reason for being angry in the first place was eclipsed, struck dead into non existance, by Aaliyah's magnificent performance of the ancient queen.
The book really needs to be read and taken all on its own and the movie thrown into the 'hollywood screwed up the story' basket. Theres a lot of that. I'd like to comment a little on the book before I get into the movie, what was forgiveable, and what wasnt.
The book continues the story of Lestat, whom fans will always love. Despite being chronological in the series of 'The Vampire Chronicles' I strongly urge anyone who hasnt read it to grab a copy and read it. This is not just a vampire story, as so many of Rice's novels prove. This is a story that manages to raise humungoes issues and discuss them - The influence of the supernatural upon the natural. The family of humanity and what it has become. True representations of ancient society and how our historians often get it wrong. Most importantly to me, this book deals with religion - loving God, Hating him, or not believing in him at all, and this effect on society, and, the all important theme of the never ending war between the sexes.
First - Supernatural and its influence on the natural. Anne Rice hints heavily that humanity should, on the whole, strive for its own existance without the help of the spiritual. That ghosts, spirits, spells and witches have outlived their usefulness, and must be discarded if humanity is to move to a higher state of being. Despite my own love and belief in the supernatural, this may well be true. This is illustrated by the vampires frequently saying that they bring humanity pain, they hold them back, and thus must be left out of the equation.
To me, it raises a deeper understanding. If witches, ghosts and vampires can be harnessed in a significant way then it may well serve to elevate humanity. If we can rid ourselves of bigotries, open our minds fully and link spirituality to science in a correct way, this may well be the new path.
The family of humanity. Maharet is the mother of a single child in the region of Egypt. Within 5000 years (or so) the bloodline of that child has spread into every country and Maharet keeps track of them all, no matter what race they have become. A beautiful illustration of the fact that humanity has 'interbred' to such an extent that there really is very little division between the races, and her 'Great Family' is indeed, all of humanity. This is illustrated by the young Jesse, who visits all aspects of the family and finds herself at home no matter what part of the world she has come to.
True representations of ancient society. Maharet mentions small things to Jesse throughout the book. Such as, societies grew hallucinegenic herbs for years before someone thought to plant a weat crop. People may keep records for storage years before someone writes a poem. These tiny yet very specific things need to be taken into account in any historical study. So often, we forget to put actual humanity into our historical figures. Historians and archaelogists may scratch their heads for years over 'why they did this' or 'how they did that' when it may be as simple as the human solution - they didnt feel like walking there. You get me?
Religion. Anne Rice was, like me, raised a catholic and once out of the influence of the church sought many answers of her own. This shines through in every book. God and the church is there, heavily, but there is a strong sense of if God is loving, why would he send basically good people to hell for one tiny thing? Anne Rice used the example of kissing her soon to be husband out of wedlock. Throughout the book the issues of religion are dealt with by Akasha herself - she has seen all religions come and go in her time, and what are they to her? She says humans are little more than animals, as she has seen it directly demonstrated over thousands of years that humanity takes to each new religion without seeking its further depth. One of my favourite parts is where Lestat asks her, dont you care about God? Worry that he will stop you? Akasha answers that there is no God but herself. She has listened to humanitys prayers for centuries, and no God has come. Save her. Now theres a gal I can get behind.
Lestat and the other vampires try to impress upon Akasha that her 'miracles' will not stun the western world. She was instantly worshipped in the smaller, more primitive regions, but they explain that in the western word of science, she will not hold up, in ideal or in miracles. She cannot heal, only kill (although this is not strictly true - vampiric blood can heal small wounds without making a vampire, and a vampire can always be made, turning human into saint in Akashas religion) and her principles will not be swallowed. I tend to disagree. It is the western woprd that seeks the answers with a greater thirst, that seeks to disprove the existance of God almost as if that might cause him to show himself, therefore, I truly think if a beautiful, shining woman were to appear and offer answers, perform miracles and demonstrate her strength (Akasha has telepathic power and hearing sufficient to listen to the other side of the globe. A clap of her hands could destroy buildings and she would be impervious to all our weapons - including nuclear blast) the western world would fall at her feet in apology.
The one flaw is her therim, and that leads me to the ageless battle of the sexes. Akasha proposes to create a new Eden, a garden of peace where humanity may flower. She does not seek to destroy humanity, she seeks to save it from itself. Her solution is to kill all male humans, leaving only one out of a hundred. She believes this will see and end to violence, to war, to rape, to crime. She speaks of how the weaker sex has always been at mans mercy and if they could be given a chance, the women would create the garden. She is convincing - particularly when talking about the future to come, when males will be allowed back into society, trying to explain to them, the horrific now of roving packs of males intent on rape and murder, talking of peace and children playing in the streets without fear. Furthermore, she suggests it as a fitting punishment for men, after the years of oppresion they have given women, the hundreds of aborted females so that a male might be chosen instead, and whole societies based upon the strength of male and how it is preferable.
If Akasha were to skew her theology just slightly, then even the western world would follow her. It is Maharet that points out, not all women are peaceful creatures, if you were to succeed, women would war, and to find out that Akasha could bestow eternal life and powers such as she herself posses', I believe, in that instance, the women would turn on her faster than the men. Chaos would ensue. As she says, 'even women would kill for that'.
Another flaw in the theology is brought up by Lestat - 'Dont you think women will fight for their men?' In the primitive cultures where they have been literally opressed, no, they did not. But in our western world, would we fight for our husbands, our brothers, our sons? You betcha. I would certainly fight for my man to be the blessed one in a hundred to survive. And I dont think I could accept the Goddess who killed him, no matter how long Ive waited for one such as her. Also, the bloodyness of her reign, how she intends to take her throne, would never be forgotten. She calls it a 'cleansing'......But so did Hitler.
Kman always brings up the point that men would fight her, armies would march forth against her. This is one perfect beauty in her plan - they could do nothing against her. Kman says, oh, modern weapons, modern soldiers, unstoppable....Akasha may be immobile during daylight hours, but she is still invulnerable. While she slept in the day they could impale her set her on fire, put her in the sun - none of these things would kill her. Even if a blade could be found that could dismember her, the pieces would find each other, and put her back together. She cannot bleed to death, decapitation slows her down a little. The armies upon armies would die in their tracks, we could waste every nuclear weapon on her flesh, still, she would be standing, ready for more, while we were all dead. More importantly, with her telepathy and telekineses, she would never allow us to begin.
I would like any people who consider themselves intelligent enough to grasp these concepts to give the book a read and come back and discuss it with me. Kmans getting sick of hearing it.
Now for the movie.
The movie explores NONE of the above issues. I considered Aaliyah an unforgivable choice to play Akasha as physically, they are extremely different. However, Aaliyah managed to portray her so well, her every movement seems alien, yet natural, the way she speaks and moves is primitive, I cant imagine any actress doing a better job. The primitive nature of Akasha is mentioned again and again in he book - not just vampiric, and infected with spirit, but old, ancient. I can really believe the figure Im seeing is 5000 years old.
The mix ups of the characters and plot are disappionting, but expected, and, surprisingly, forgiveable, as the movie clicks along at its own pace. The visuals are stunning, sensual, erotic, offset by the magnificent soundtrack. I want it, but after hearing that the original singer was not able to sing on the soundtrack, now Im not so keen. Most of it being shot in Melbourne is a big plus, and I would never have expected and Australian director to manage a vampire movie so well. Theres a certain delicacy needed, before it goes off into the realms of hokey tongue in cheek, and this was done with grace.
I really cant get over them saying that Marius made Lestat. How hard would it have been to give us a five minute scene of Lestat being made by Magnus? Then you could have brought in Marius, same relationship if you like. Still, its easy to forget as the movie follows its own storyline.
I forgive them easily for omitting 'The Story of the Twins' its mammoth, huge, it takes up a whole part in the novel. However, in omitting the twins, they have taken out the urgancy in Akasha's death scene. As queen, if she dies, they all die. That is not explored. And really needs to be there so you can be on the edge of your seat at the end. Defeating her seems impossible, but even if they can, it is suicide. Full on, fellas!
The one thing, I cannot, ever forgive in this movie is Akasha's death scene. Since when does hollywood cop out of decapitation? Akasha is decapitated, and in this time, her hand tries to re attach her head to her body. Its a monumental scene. All the vampires are experiencing the same disorientation, and death pangs, all seems lost because, if Akasha cant re attach her head, they all die. If she does, they still have to stop her. Akasha's final death is decided by Maharet and Mekare - somehow, through disorientation they manage to get to Akasha, take her heart and brain (where the spirit of the vampire is thought to be) and Mekare devours them.
No matter how many times I read the book, I expect those pages to change, and Akasha to live.
And no matter how much I love the movie, I cannot forgive the lackluster final scene. Ok, omit the twins - how about a death match between Maharet and Akasha, and Maharet eats the heart and brain? That could have worked. Some reason even, for the barely impacting endng, would be useful.
So thats my take. Add it to the list.
| 42 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Nevar
Is Why
Oh, yeah, got it . . . you and the author Anne Rice are fearless when it comes to facing the dark side.
She has a delightfully mischievous grin ~ I suspect you do as well.
Comment by Kleonaptra
Kalikapsychosis
The point Im trying to make is that every single book in the 'Vampire Chronicles' is more than just a vampire story. Sure, thats the reason I gobbled them up, but nothing suceeds without incorporating universal truth. These books all deal with heavy issues for mankind - The Vampire Lestat deals with meaniglessness in life, one of Lestats favourite quotes for me - "And even when we die, theres nothing, we never even find out the reason for being alive! Everything is meaningless!" His best friend suffers a deep depression, where Lestat is determined to enjoy life no matter what may come. Its hard hitting for all humans, if you are reading all the aspects.
Queen of The Damned is my favourite, but 'Body Theif' is also interesting, aspects of good versus evil and if you are not YOU, are you still yourself? And just when we think the Queen of horror cant take us any further, she gives us 'Memnoch the Devil' and takes us to heaven and to hell.
I am urging her greater audiance to see further than the blood sucking fiends. There really is so much more in this lady's mind.
Favourite Qoute of all time
Comment by Nevar
Is Why
Comment by Kleonaptra
Kalikapsychosis