Jump to content

Talk:Interview with the Vampire

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

I removed a link that redirect to itself, about movie adaptation.Boris Crépeau 03:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

[edit]

I added a cleanup template to this article, it's total trash at the moment. There is a section about how the book differs from the film (which is the only real content in this article) except it's disjointed, sophomoric and repetitive. It's comprised of several run-on sentences, and would only make sense if juxtaposed with a paragraph explaining the storyline of the film. I'll try to improve it when I have time. Moe Aboulkheir 23:33, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read once that:

  • the novel is based on an earlier novella of Rice's
  • Claudia is based on her daughter, who died on leukaemia

Could a die-hard fan confirm? -- Tarquin 16:42 Sep 1, 2002 (PDT)


In the movie, does't the interview take place in San Francisco? - User:Olivier

Yes, it does. At the beginning of the movie you can see the camera sweeping over the Golden Gate Bridge and through the streets until it focuses on the outside of the building where the interview talkes place in. Also, at the end of the movie (altered quite drastically from the book-version), you can see Daniel driving over the Golden Gate Bridge in his hasty get-away.


after Cruise refused to shoot the originally scripted scenes where he was to seduce a young, muscular plantation worker in the man's bedroom, ultimately biting the man on his chest and then licking the blood that was to drip down the man's body. The scene was rewritten for Cruise so Lestat would instead be killing the young suitor of an old woman on the sprawling grounds of her plantation against a tree fully clothed...due to his insistances of script changes in order to suit his ego.

Wtf? Did someone just pull this out of their hairy arse? Wheres the proof? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.108.220 (talk) 10:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Split Movie / Book

[edit]

Don't split the book and moive are to differnt entitys. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.100.226.27 (talk • contribs) 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be split into 2 articles

  • Interview With a Vampire (Book)
  • Interview With a Vampire (Movie)

The two are substanitatly different. I'm not the biggest fan of either (eg, I don't want to have to do the work) but I feel such a split could make this section of wikipedia much more useful. --Kode 21:59, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In what way are they substantially different (haven't read or seen either in awhile)? Jeff schiller 21:14, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
They're very similar actually. There are a few differences between the book and the movie, other than that, not much has changed. I think it would be redundant to split this article into two. Separate sections about the movie and the book could work though. EliasAlucard|Talk 11:09, 13 Sept, 2005 (UTC)
That's what I suspected. Jeff schiller 14:06, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea of separate articles or at least separate sections. Book/Movie trivia and details should be separated from each other to avoid confusion and increase clarity. Absynthia 17:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Length

[edit]

What's the difference between the PAL and NTSC versions? It seems that the length of the movie is the only difference. Does anyone know more about this? Would be cool if it would've been featured more prominently in the article. EliasAlucard|Talk 12:07, 13 Sept, 2005 (UTC)

PAL and NTSC are encoded differently. PAL sources usually have a slightly lower frame rate, thus resulting in a slightly shorter running time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.76.60.162 (talk) 00:56, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Book movie discrepancy

[edit]

There was mention that the movie failed to address the fact that making a child a vampire was not allowed. Looks like somone noticed this was incorrect and rather than removing the text they added an argument. I remember the line the person did mention so i removed their addition as well as the text that they were arguing against (since it is untrue). It may not have been emphasized as much in the movie, but it certainly was implied. --Mr. Dude †@£К ║ Çøת†яĭβü†ĬŎИ 17:22, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I personally am not fit to clean this article up, as it has been close to ten years since viewing the movie, but it is very terribly written as it stands. Please, someone, write this article up to be worthwhile.--Lazarus Plus 20:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Book vs. Film"

[edit]

This section is awful. Why on earth are we going into all these details about differences in the plots of the movie and the book when there's no basic plot description of either? It seems to me that, as people suggest earlier, the book and movie should be split up. Plot similarities/differences aside, this would allow the article on the book to focus on stuff having to do with the book (publication, relation to other books in the series, etc.), and the article on the movie to focus on stuff having to do with the movie (production details, cast, crew, and so forth). The article on the book should describe the plot of the book in a normal way, and the article on the movie should describe the plot, and note differences with the book. john k 19:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Hbackman 01:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two different articles should be created with in depth information on each in their respective articles. Book vs. Film can be condensed to the broadest terms and placed in the film's article.

"Film Plot"

[edit]

Expanation of plot from the film contains numerious wrong details. The whole section revolving around Claudia needs to be cleaned up with correct information and the vague areas need to clarified.

Influence on Japan

[edit]

There is an official Japanese manga of IWTV & lots of doujinshis. Also, there was a Japanese band called Malice Mizer who used lines from the IWTV movie in a song called Transylvania, not to mention the vocalist at that time; Gackt, has a music video where he went back & forth between being dressed like Louis & Lestat. Lastly, the anime NIGHTWALKER is believed heavily to be anywhere from overtly inspired to actually ripping-off IWTV due to overwhelming coincidences. I'm willing to provide images, sources, & information to anyone willing to compile & publish the information. --LikaLaruku 06:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a page on it by Bane Huntress; http://bane-huntress.com/Vampire/IwtV-Mainpage.html

Splitting taking place now

[edit]

I'm splitting the book and movie into separate articles as I did with The Queen of the Damned. Please bear with me while the move is in progress. The movie will be at Interview with the Vampire (film).--Canley 13:26, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict between (book) and (film) articles

[edit]

The section about the film in this article conflicts with information in the article about the film re: Anne Rice's choice of actors for Lestat.207.69.137.26 03:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Savage Garden"

[edit]

If I remember correctly, it is Lestat not Louis who uses the expression Savage Garden, and is first mentioned in The Vampire Lestat. So wouldn't it be inappropriate to mention it in this article?JanderVK (talk) 13:30, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. I just finished the book and found no reference to it. StevePrutz (talk) 14:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Hell Bells", "Devil's Path", and "Savage Garden" are metaphores used by Lestat the first time in "The Vampire Lestat". I think that, as nobody has done it, I'll erase that part of the article. If anybody has an objection, please tell me so and we'll reverse my doings.The Brat Princess (talk) 08:44, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Interview with the Vampire/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:20, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Initial impressions are that it's a bit spartan. A book such as this in a genre such as this should have spawned some more discussion somewhere that can be added to this - although it could be tricky deciding what should be here and what should be at The Vampire Chronicles (and that needs cleanup!).
There are a lot of sources, as you guessed, but not many of them reliable or of high quality. I had a hell of a time finding sources for criticism and commentary at Anne Rice last year. I will dig up some of those, though, and see what I can find that's directly prurient to this book. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 00:26, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The lead is short. I read her biography many years ago and the sequence of her depression after her daughter's death and projecting emotions into writing this book was pretty detailed. I think that needs to be expanded upon in the body of the text and mentioned in the lead.
I agree. Will do some work on that as well. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 00:26, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Added some more detail in that regard, but it will need more work. I will smooth out the prose more tomorrow (haven't slept in a while, so there's probably a few awkward spots!) and get around to adding more material in the next few days. There is a specific quote from Rice on this subject that I recall but cannot find. If I can track that down, I think it will be a big help. Thanks! Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 04:30, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am sure I recall her writing retrospectively that she got bored of writing from Louis POV and switched to Lestat as she found him more interesting - if we can find that and work it in somehow.
Yes, I vaguely recall that statement as well. I'm not sure that would terribly relevant to this article, though, since the first time she wrote from Lestat's point-of-view would have been in The Vampire Lestat (another article I would like to improve when I can find the time.. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 00:26, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gotta run now but will see what I've got and ask around.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Casliber! Thanks for starting this page; I've just now happened across it, in fact. Give me a few days and I'll see what I can do about the issues you raised above. Look forward to the rest of your comments! Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 04:21, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Should have time to dig into the sources Sunday night, west-coast time. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 00:28, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, where was I.....a bit of rejigging and reads better now. Forgot about this one. If possible, needs some more discussion on criticism/impact and the lead needs to be a bit larger, but reads ok and on target for GA. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:12, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Casliber asked me to look around for some sources on this novel - there are loads of excellent scholarly sources which should be used here. See Google Scholar for starters. Try also searching the MLA database and JSTOR - I found over 50 in a search for the title of the novel alone. The article really should have sections on the themes of the novel and the genre of the novel (at bare minimum). You can get this information both from works by literary scholars and from book reviews. You can find book reviews in LexisNexis and there will be hundreds since it was such a popular novel. I hope this helps! Wadewitz (talk) 23:35, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes - (I shoulda realised some of this myself but all eyes are good :) ) thanks for dropping in. Cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:
Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:
Citations to reliable sources, where required:
No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:
Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:


Overall:

Pass or Fail: - look, I think this has good foundations and I am sorry to do this, but this has been fallow for a while. Wadewitz points out above and I agree that it really needs a much more detailed out-of-universe treatment (critique/genre etc.) - this will take some time of reading and reviewing sources so rather than leave this on hold, I am just closing this now for the time being. After some buffing, I'd be happy to re-review. I might even have a look myself for some sources and collaborate. Can't now as too much other stuff on my plate. Anyway, give me a yell when you want to work on it, cheers. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:05, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Interview with the Vampire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:23, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Title Source

[edit]

In chapter 36 of Varney the Vampire, we read Flora had made concerning her most singular and deeply interesting interview with the vampyre. Did Rice ever discuss whether her title was merely descriptive, or a lift from this classic work? Count Robert of Paris (talk) 23:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adaptation Citations

[edit]

I added some citations in Adaptations underneath the comics subheading since there were none before. I mainly cited comics.org since it had the most information and was the most reliable source out of what I could find. Still not sure it is reliable enough to be cited, so if anyone finds a better site I'd encourage you to change it.

Also, finding a citation for the statement "A Japanese manga adaptation by Udou Shinohara was published in 1994 by Tokuma Shoten" proved very difficult to the point that I left it as a [citation needed]. The only sources I could find were sketchy anime sites and fan pages so, again, if you can find anything reliable that would be great. Here's some sites to start with, though I can't promise the info is correct:

https://www.mangaupdates.com/author/hlivodj/shinohara-udou

https://www.anime-planet.com/manga/yoake-no-vampire

https://myanimelist.net/manga/8570/Interview_with_the_Vampire

https://interviewwiththevampire.wordpress.com/adaptations/

https://www.tokuma.jp/ StarrySkye1205 (talk) 05:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Interview_with_the_Vampire&oldid=1217326957"