Talk:Interview with the Vampire (film)

Differences b/w novel and movie?

Shouldn't it have more info on plot instead? Soymotel 22:03, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I am adding a few minor pieces of info to the differences between the book and movie, mostly to sections already given. I am also removing the absurd "unverified claims" tag, as the book and movie are the obvious resources.JanderVK (talk) 10:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

The table was removed entirely.[1] The details listed seem minor. There may yet be interesting details about the writing and adaptation of the story from book to screen that could be used to expand the Production section but a comparison table or a list "Differences" is not a good way to do it. -- 109.78.202.228 (talk) 22:15, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Plot

What actually happens in this movie? I'd like to know... Colin4C 10:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Watch the movie, might help ;)JanderVK (talk) 10:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

The whole point of an encyclopedia is to find out without experiencing. The pot has been improved. Now someone should work on the reception.

more missing sections

Where is the release/box office information? And how about critical response?

Should there be some information on what was added in the directors cut version? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.185.55.209 (talk) 06:39, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Louis3.jpg

Image:Louis3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Anne Rice is female. Some one should really fix that instance where SHE is said "himself". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.224.143 (talk) 04:03, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Another difference between book and film

When I initially read the books after seeing the movies I noticed that the explicit nature of Lestat being bisexual is removed entirely from the movies. I was pretty surprised by the differences like higher level of sex and gore.69.207.32.133 (talk) 14:28, 27 December 2008 (UTC) No doubt the movie is very sanitized, but I thought it made clear of the bisexual nature of Lestat and Louis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.157.10 (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Reception

according to http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110148/ the film was nominated for two oscars this is clearly more important then oprah winfrey walking out —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.137.93.129 (talk) 00:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I removed the thing about Oprah, as it's hardly relevant because she isn't a noted/professional film critc. I also added a line about the award nominations it received. 124.179.173.61 (talk) 14:43, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

For some reason Oprah was added back again. She's entitled to her opinion but as someone who only say 10 minutes of the film it simply is not relevant to this article which is supposed to be about the film. (Even if someone believs it is worth including it is entirely WP:UNDUE and frankly bizarre that Oprah gets twice as much text as 5 film critics critics.) -- 109.78.202.228 (talk) 21:54, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

I see Oprah was removed in 2009[2] but added back without amy explanation in 2010.[3] It made slightly more sense at the time because of the line "Prior to the film's release there was much controversy over the amount of violence in the film" which provided some context, but it still does not belong in the Critical response section. -- 109.78.202.228 (talk) 22:02, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Summary

I changed it from 'Interview with a Vampire' to 'Interview with the Vampire' so everything was correct. Beyoh (talk) 20:41, 30 June 2016 (UTC)