SCREEN-L Archives

August 1993


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Maureen Russell <[log in to unmask]>
Mon, 2 Aug 1993 11:26:00 PDT
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (28 lines)
Robert reports the sad news:
> > Tom Cruise been signed to play Lestat in Interview with the Vampire-
> > scheduled release Summer of '94. Now that it's official
> > (unless it changes) does anyone else think he's horribly miscast?
Kelly concurs:
> YES! I had to reply to this because as soon as I heard about this (in
> Entertainment Weekly 7/30 - though a friend had heard the rumor through
> Variety earlier and I refused to believe) a bunch o us Rice fans got
> together to moan and groan over it! I try not to judge an actor by what
> roles he's already played but Cruise just seems so so... well, wholesome.
> He  just doesn't fit the image I have in mind of a Ricean character. Then
> again, he could surprise me, or drop the part. Meanwhile it's great to
> know that I'm not the only one who heard this and said "ugh!"
And my $0.02:
I think the producers have lost their collective minds.  Cruise as
Lestat?  Anne Rice has probably thrown herself in front of a trolley
on the St. Charles line.  She has said again and again that she always
thought of Lestat as Rutger Hauer (in his younger, thinner days).
I, myself, could have seen Sting in the role (a role he reportely wanted.)
I can only assume the Producers have never read the book and the screenplay
has rewritten "Vampire" history.  Lestat is young, seductive, sexually
ambiguous and blond!  (As I recall, in fact, Lestat is under 20.)
I don't see Tom Cruise as any of those things.  But his casting is
obviously a marketing decision, not a creative one.
--Maureen @ UCLA