Almost Famous was not only an inspiring coming of age story, but its costume design left its viewers (including myself) wishing we lived in a time when “make love not war” was a generation’s anthem–if not for the great music and civil rights movement demanding racial equality, then for the fashions. Case in point: A gorgeous peasant top and embroidered blue dress and boots worn by the incomparable Penny Lane played by Kate Hudson (she completely deserved that Oscar!).

Costume designer who deserves all the credit: Betsy Heimann. Thank you!

photo clips from the movie you will fall in love with: Almost Famous

Next…

Chocolat.

What a fantastic film!! Vianne Rocher played by Juliette Binoche (above left) was spell-binding. I need to find more and better examples of the wardrobe for this film, but this will do for now. I have to say that with every new scene I was just itching to know what else Vianne would wear. Never a disappointment. Can’t help but mention the obvious: Johnny Depp as Roux was looking pretty great too. Moving on…her daughter Anouk, played by the absolutely lovable Victoire Thivisol, had an especially enviable closet. I appreciated the transformation the characters of Armande and Josephine (above top right), played by Judi Dench and Lena Olin respectively, experienced was emphasized through their newly colorful attire. Gosh, I really need to show you more photos of each character–I think this movie calls for its own post.

Costume designer : Renee Ehrlich Kalfus; was nominated for a BAFTA for her work in this film

Image found at Oplan: Paris, France

And of course Audrey Tautou in…Amélie

Amelie was such an enchanting film…I fell in love with it immediately and will always remember it for its unique storyline and color palette filled with rich hues. The wardrobe department was certainly invested in wisely and it’s nice to actually notice how much of an impact the use of color can have on a film. Please go and see this movie: Audrey Tautou at her best. (Actually, Coco Avant Chanel was GREAT too.)

Costume designers: Madeline Fontaine & Emma Lebail

Amelie clips 1 & 2.

The next movie just had me bursting at the seams in anticipation of what else Zooey Deschanel–who was also in Almost Famous and whose role may have seemed small but was soooooooooo well done–was gloriously going to lavish us with.

(500) Days of Summer. An indie flick that I’d had my eye on for a while made its mark in 2009.

Did you notice that Summer wore a lot of blue? Well it turns out that Zooey Deschanel’s blue eyes influenced that decision. What I didn’t notice was that no one else does..wear blue that is, until Summer and Tom begin to fall for each other. Read more about it in this interview. Costume designer Hope Hanafin wanted to keep her wardrobe affordable while mixing a lot of vintage pieces with pieces from BCBG, Old Navy, and Gap. I loved it all and want to own it all.

Costume designer: Hope Hanafin

Thank you Ellie Snow for assembling this collage and great blog by the way. Check it out here.

I’m sure I could go on, but I’m going to go ahead and save some of my favorite films and their wardrobes for a later post. (The classic Breakfast at Tiffany’s will be there for sure.)

Which films’ fashions inspire you?

Remember Me is a new film starring Robert Pattinson which is coming out this year, can he move away from Edward Cullen? I guess we will have to see this to try and find out . . .

_________________________________________________________________________

WATCHED – THE UNBEARABLE LIGHTNESS OF BEING (1988) – 2/JAN

_________________________________________________________________

Director: Philip Kaufman

Genre: Drama, Romance

Starring: Daniel Day-Lewis, Juliette Binoche, Lena Olin

Written by: Jean-Claude Carrière, Philip Kaufman, novel by Milan Kundera.

Duration: 171 mins

_________________________________________________________________

Sunday. The day of rest. Or in my case the day of heavily editing this blog and finally setting it free to the world via Twitter and Facebook. If the truth be known I was a bit scared of sending round links to this thing quite yet as it is still in its very early stages, but what the hell. Besides, my tiny little hit list has jumped up to double figures (go me with my 22 views).

Last night I watched ‘The Unbearable Lightness of Being’ (1988) starring Daniel Day Lewis, Juliette Binoche and Lena Olin. The film followed the life of Tomas, a Czech doctor whose one great passion in life is women. The one woman who can understand his need for lust and passion is the independent but commitment-phobic Sabina (Lena Olin). When Tomas meets Tereza (Juliette Binoche), a strangely eccentric and bookish young woman, he begins to finally feel love.It is a beautiful film, placing this romantic story among the sad and tumultuous history of Prague during Soviet occupation in 1968.

It is rare that I see sex scenes necessary in films, a lot of the time they are simply put in to titillate and offer a conclusion to a relationship. In this film, however, I thought they were used wonderfully. The opening scenes of a sexual nature are fun and free, you almost feel like smiling when Sabina dons her iconic bowler hat. Later on, however, as Prague becomes militarized and each life is altered by the politics surrounding them, the sex scenes become darker and far more serious.

Never is this more notable than when Tereza and Tomas each engage in simultaneous infidelities. Tereza with a man she has met at the bar in which she works and Tomas with a politician’s wife who has seduced him during his task of cleaning her windows (Confessions of a window cleaner anyone?).

Tereza’s sad attempt at distancing herself from emotion during sex, trying to become more like her insensitive Casanova of a lover, culminates in one of the most emotionally charged scenes of the film as she offers herself to this stranger (Stellan Skarsgård). It is later supposed that he is an undercover police officer aiming at seducing her in order to get to Tomas. Sex has been tainted by politics and it seems that even love has been effected by the world surrounding it.

One criticism I would have of this film (and this is, I believe, because the film is based on a book and therefore structured as such) is that it seems to be split quite obviously into chapters which often tend to disjoint the flow somewhat. However, this biopic style structure allows you to know the characters so well that you become incredibly attached to them. The acting is such that you believe you could know each of them. Even Binoche (who I must admit I did not quite understand as a character at first due to her being, well, a little weird) grows on you and you end up loving her as much as Tomas.

My final word on this film would be that it is a beautiful story of developing love, as well as the freedom and happiness that can be associated with sex (something that tends to be overlooked whenever films deal with promiscuous characters). The relationship between Sabina and Tomas is joyous and I often found it difficult to condemn them despite their obvious infidelities and lack of morals when it came to relationships. The political aspect was dealt with amazingly and melded well with the humanity of the film. One of the most human love stories I have ever encountered.

Moving on to tonight’s endeavors. Next up it is Ingmar Bergman’s ‘The Seventh Seal’ (1957). Yes boys and girls, we are jumping in at the deep end without a snorkel and the water is actually hydrochloric acid. We are talking life, death and chess now guys. The big questions. So get your scythes and cowls at the ready, polish your armor and man the battlements. Here. We. Go.

Related Article: WHY NOT MAKE THEM HAPPY? WHY NOT SCARE THEM?

I was watching E!’s show 10 Vampires We Love shortly after I came home from watching New Moon. The show was a countdown of the vampires that the people of E! like. I’ll include the list at the end of this post. Anyway, I have a bone to pick with who they chose to be on the list. I noticed that the list didn’t include, in my opinion, a variety of vampires, and the fact that all, except one, of the vampires are from movies or tv shows that came out within the last ten years. Anyway, what I mean by the lack of variety is that four of the vampires came from two different sources. I find it biased like how this post is. The reason that I have a problem is that they didn’t include other vampires like Henry Fitzpatrick from Blood Ties, Mick St. John from Moonlight or any of the vampires from the Vampire Chronicles or The Lost Boys. I don’t think it’s right to put a relatively unknown vampire like Santinico Pandemonium or Dracula from Dracula 2000 on a list like 10 Vampires We Love when there are better qualified vampires out there.

10. Ian Somerhalder as Damon Salvatore
9. Ashley Greene as Alice Cullen
8. David Boreanaz as Angel
7. Stephen Moyer as Bill Compton
6. Selma Hayek as Santanico Pandemonium
5. Gerard Butler as Dracula in Dracula 2000
4. Wesley Snipes as Blade
3. Kate Beckinsale as Selene
2. Alexander Skarsgaard as Eric Northman
1. Robert Pattinson as Edward Cullen

I got to watch New Moon on the day after the premiere, and I’m telling you, the whole experience was nuts. As soon as I sat down to watch the movie, and the New Moon title screen came up, the rest of the audience started to scream. I thought to myself, jeez, what a bunch of crazy fan girls. Now keep in mind that while I like the books and the movies, I will forever be a Vampire Chronicles fan. Anyway, again, everybody screamed when Edward and Jacob came on, as well as when Jacob took off his shirt for the first time. Now, I can understand why everybody was screaming when Jacob took his shirt off for the first time, but why for Edward? I’m sorry, but I think that Edward is a pasty-ass pansy. Anyway, overall, I think that the movie was ok. There were quite a bit of funny parts but I think the movie is just a bunch of notable scenes from the book that was just pieced together and made into a movie. I gotta admit though, it’s very Chris Weitz. I say that because it reminded me of the movie that he did before, The Golden Compass. Both The Golden Compass and New Moon were edited very similarly. Anyway, don’t let my opinion deter you from watching the movie.

In my Lestat vs. Edward pictures post, one of the pictures that I mentioned had a reaction from Armand. It made me think. There’s a similarity between Armand/Marius and Bella/Edward relationships. The similarity is that Armand and Bella were both humans that were turned into vampires by their respective vampire lovers, Marius and Edward. I didn’t really realize that until I saw Armand’s reaction in that picture. I just thought that was interesting.

Lena Olin (Irina Derevko on Alias) will guest star on an episode of Law & Order: SVU!! She play the attorney of a billionaire played by Richard Burgi (Desperate Housewives, Harper’s Island) who is entangled in a kidnapping case. Sounds JUICY!!!

I don’t know much about Lena Olin except she’s an oscar and emmy nominee but I am EXCITED to see this episode mostly because of Richard Burgi!!! HE IS SOOOO GORGEOUS!! I LOVE HIM!! LOVE HIM!! 

The episode will air sometime in February!! 

The first two minutes of the film Chocolat (2000) are highly revealing as to the concept of what film academic S. Brent Plate describes in his book Religion and Film (2008) as two ‘contrasting spaces’ which essentially represent two ‘contrasting worlds.’ During this introductory segment the viewer is able to become accustomed to (through a number of cinematic lingual elements) a central strand in the film’s narrative; the way in which regimented religious structure and pleasure driven business can become two conflicting sectors in society.

The first thing heard in the film is piano playing musical notes on a higher register; Rachel Portman’s score suggests a tranquillity and the viewer may feel enticed; yet the fact that it is played in a minor key suggests that something is foreboding, perhaps this calmness and peace will soon disappear. This is relevant as the order of the town is destroyed when the new chocolate shop appears.

The first titles that appear are basic in their format; this simplicity matches the feel of the town we will later visit. The town is a place which on the surface of things seems devoid of modern complications that perhaps the church feels it is able to keep in order. Beyond this simplicity, the white and black colours suggest that their actions may be viewed as one of two things; right or wrong, which contrasts the complexities of the confectionery seller with her questionable morality.

Beyond the titles, the first things filmed are what look like clouds, which the camera glides through. The viewer may assume that we are now descending through the clouds from somewhere high up in the sky; are we being told that God is watching?  This could be true when seen in relation to the church and it’s aims. However, when the camera moves beyond these apparent clouds, we see that we are not descending from the sky, rather moving horizontally through what looks like mist. This illusion could well imply that the supposed divine intentions of the town’s religious leaders are in no way inflicted by a higher power, rather by human will.

The long shot of the entire town reveals a number of things; firstly the size of the town; it is a small place where presumably not many people live, which suggests that any changes to daily life will be noticed by all of the town’s inhabitants and that any sort of control; be it political, criminal, commercial or religious, won’t take much to create a stir.

Secondly this long shot establishes the position of the town; it is high up on a hill and in the middle of the countryside. This could well mean that the town is difficult to reach and maybe is a place that is untainted by the proverbial ‘big dark world’ around it. This sets the film up as the shop owner moves into the town and is a modern and fresh addition to a town which is steeped in traditional values.

Thirdly this long shot reveals the church as the tallest and most central landmark of the town. The viewers eyes are immediately drawn to it, which serves the purpose of it being the institution that’s existence is threatened. It is at the centre of the town and the centre of the lives of the town’s citizens.

Two sound effects are heard when the music stops; birds singing and church bells ringing. The birds once again allude to the town’s apparent tranquillity but also could be read to symbolically represent new life and new beginnings; something which the town is about to experience. Things are about to change and become transformed.

The church bells are a familiar sound to even the most pagan of viewers; most people know that they are rung in order to call people to church, or at least to draw attention to it. These bells however are not tuneful, but are somewhat monotonous and off-key; which could well refer to the fact that the weekly routine of going to church is not a joy to these people, these bells are not joyous or inviting, rather they are boring and dreary. The viewer when hearing this will perhaps view see that this place does not achieve the things that a good church should; contrastly it is a place of boredom and weekly duty.

We are now shown a straight on shot of Comte Reynaud (Alfred Molina), this shot suggests that he is someone who is not necessarily of any threat; but the straightness insures that he is definitely in control. As people pass him and enter the church, this notion is confirmed when he signals to a man to remove his hat, almost like a school teacher. This is not a man who lets anything go unnoticed, especially rebellion; something that Vianne (Juliette Binoche) has plenty of.

The costume choice of black, his removed hat and the facial hair on his upper lip (moustache) all suggest that Comte is a man of conservative persuasion. This prepares the viewer to see him in juxtaposition to Vianne who is presented as progressive and daring.

The church is framed from a lower view-point suggesting its domineering nature. This church is not a place that is open to sinners who can find solace in it’s forgiving nature; rather it is a place which gives it’s members no freedom or joy; something which the chocolate shop can happily offer (especially in the month of lent).

A French church, similar to the one used in Chocolat.

A good point on the fact that this is a wide-angle shot is made by Plate;

A significant early shot is taken from the opening of what will become the chocolate shop, and the wide-angle camera is forced to point high to take in the height of the church towering above it.

The fact that this shot is taken from where the chocolate shop is established implies that these two places are in head to head conflict which is definitely seen throughout the film in the fact that both places stand for such different values.

This opening sequence of filmic images all combine to portray the film’s core narrative line; two very different worlds colliding. Those who manage to watch the film all the way to the end see that the two world’s eventually settle their differences and that Vianne undergoes an earth shattering change of her very own. This film does not necessarily serve to highlight a negativity towards the Christian church as a whole; rather it’s message discourages regimented and freedom infringment in religion and in politics. In the same way, the film is not necessarily encouraging chocolate binges or revolutionary retail, rather it would be better to read it as an acknowledgement of the beauty of freedom and enjoyment (namely the enjoyment of Chocolate).

I was looking up Edward Cullen on Wikipedia and I saw that it said that Edward was a Byronic hero. Because of that, I clicked on the link that explained what a Byronic hero was. Anyway, as I was reading the characteristics, it did sounds like Edward As I continued down the website, it mentioned that Lestat from the Vampire Chronicles and the Phantom from the Phantom of the Opera were Byronic heros as well, but I digress with the Phantom. That made me think about how much Lestat and Edward were alike in the sense that they are both Byronic heros. I think that’s the reason why I don’t like either character. I mean, it’s not that I hate them, but it’s just that they’re not my favorites characters from their respective series. Anyway, I think that’s the reason why I don’t like Lestat and Edward is the fact that they’re Byronic heros.

In my search for any Lestat vs. Edward stuff, I found quite a few pictures that made fun of Edward and the Twilight series or making fun of the fact the Twilight series “outshines” the Vampire Chronicles. The one that I found to be the most funny was the one where it showed Edward and Bella together in the first box, and the following three boxes showing Louis, Lestat, and Armand telling their opinions on the series. I found that Lestat’s and Armand’s reactions to be the most funny. Their reactions were classic Lestat and Armand. Anyway, the next one that I thought was funny was the one where Lestat as picking on Edward. I just found those funny. By the way, you can find the originals at this site.

I was bored recently and was on my computer I don’t know why but I typed Lestat vs. Edward into Google to see what I would get. Anyway, a lot of stuff that popped up were drawings of people making fun of Edward through Lestat’s point of view, and videos and articles asking who would win in a no-holds bar fight. I immediately thought that Lestat would definitely win. I say that because, after looking up their powers as a refresher, while Edward has super strength, super speed, and can read minds, Lestat can do or has all of that, plus so much more. Lestat also has pyrokinesis, the ability to fly, and he’s telekinetic. Plus, he killed an entire wolf pack by himself, albeit with the help of his two mastiff dogs. Anyway, I really think that Lestat would definitely win the fight against Edward, and that’s assuming Lestat doesn’t fall in love with Edward first, which I doubt would actually happen, and that Lestat doesn’t hurt Bella.

O Transtorno Afetivo Bipolar faz parte do cotidiano de muita gente, e a maior compreensão vem também de uma maior exposição deste transtorno dentro da mídia de comunicação em massa.

O filme Mr Jones trata justamente sobre isso: Mr. Jones (Richard Gere) é um homem impulsivo e fascinante, que atrai as pessoas com o seu encanto e a sua energia vital. No entanto, por vezes passa bruscamente desse estado de euforia para um enorme desespero.
A sua psiquiatra, a Dra. Elizabeth Bowen (Lena Olin) está decidida a ajudá-lo.

Mas antes que dê por isso, estará profundamente ligada a ele.

Aqui tem o link pro blog onde vocês poderão fazer o download e assistir esse filme

Assistam ao filme, esperamos que ela ajude a entender um poco mais sobre o cotidiano de pacientes que possuem este transtorno

The Unbearable Lightness of Being (1988)

I’ve always felt it is a mistake to compare a film adaptation to its literary counterpart. The Unbearable Lightness of Being, as a novel, is hugely significant and wonderful. As a film, it is not necessarily true to the book and that is solely because as a film it is not capable of being true to the book. I would compare making a movie out of Milan Kundera’s novel to making a video game out of the Godfather or Pulp Fiction. If that was done we run into issues like forgetting to include the priorities of game play, or simply cashing in on the success of the film. With the Unbearable Lightness of Being, there are inevitably going to be lovers of the book waiting to attack the film, and that has happened. Of course it prioritizes itself efficiently as a cinematic experience, while at the same time it makes for about as good an adaptation of the novel as you can possibly get. It wasn’t a filmable story to begin with and even Kundera came forward and said that, but he also consulted the writers of the screenplay. So comparisons between the film and novel are in my opinion pointless but also inescapable. I’ve already made them myself.

Tomas (Daniel Day Lewis) and Sabina (Lena Olin)

I’m not going to summarize the whole film for you as that would probably be too long-winded and could potentially spoil the story. I’ll introduce the characters, place them in a setting and then say go. The film takes place in Prague in 1968 just after Alexander Dubcek lead the Prague Spring advancement. Soon after that the characters suffer through further reform following the eventual invasion of the Soviets and the Warsaw Pact. The film opens with two characters who are lighthearted and carefree lovers. Tomas is a surgeon and womanizer who lives life as though sex and love are two very different things. Sabina is an artist who, in the eyes of Tomas, embodies sex. Tomas soon meets the more heavyhearted Thereza, a waitress and aspiring photographer, who embodies innocence. They are opposites but soon Tereza will also embody love in the eyes of Tomas.

Juliette Binoche as Tereza

The characters in The Unbearable Lightness of Being evolve wonderfully in a significant and chaotic backdrop, but they never steer from their passions. It is layered as not only a romance, but also as a story about rebellion, and as an erotic dance; but ultimately it is an existential story. A few of these points are strengths only realized if the book is read first. Not that I’d definitely recommend doing that if you haven’t already, as the book does stand higher in it’s own medium than the film does and you may be setting yourself up for disappointment. Some of the deeper messages are unquestionably somewhat muted in the film.

Hey, for those bored with a three hour period romance with subtitles, there's plenty of great nudity.

Again though, judged solely as a cinematic narrative, Director Phillip Kauffman makes The Unbearable Lightness of Being a beautiful movie and delves deeply enough into these characters and their world that he manages to capture some of Kundera’s vision, while adding his own motion picture flare. I’m conflicted as to whether this movie should be celebrated as a triumph in terms of Kundera’s novel, but I’m not conflicted in the least as to whether or not this is a great movie all by itself.

My rating is 4 out of 5 stars.

Could this crap actually happen?

While undergoing a heart transplant, Clay (Hayden Christensen) experiences “anesthetic awareness,” a condition that allows him to see and feel everything that’s happening to him but leaves him paralyzed and unable to do anything about it. From his unique and painful vantage point, Clay learns troubling truths about his young wife (Jessica Alba) as she struggles with her own demons.

When I actually watched this film I was expecting to be laughing my ass off at some of the cheesiest moments in cinema ever, but I was very surprised and ultimately absorbed.

First, I’m going to start on the bad stuff. Now I’m no doctor and don’t really care or understand about the body and health and everything like that, but this film is one of the biggest inaccuracies about health there has ever been. There a lot of improper uses of anesthetic procedures in this that just made me turn my head and wonder.

The premise is actually very interesting and original, but after awhile it starts to turn into a murder mystery, then out of nowhere it turns out that Hayden Christensen has an out of body experience like Swayze from Ghost. This is where this movie takes the turn for the worst and it starts to be just a normal clue-found murder mystery. Also, in many of these mind-bending psychological films there are usually very deep and touching messages, by the end. However, in Awake there isn’t really a message other than being rich is pretty cool.

I felt myself very attached to this film by the end however. I realized to myself that this is strictly a suspense and not supposed to be all that accurate. There are a lot of really interesting twist and turns that actually make this film less dumb and more interesting.

Hayden Christiensen actually as bad as he is as an actor, does a pretty ok job in this but he could’ve done a lot better. I feel like a lot of his moments were forced and not emotional enough to create a very believable character. The supporting cast does well by the end and actually do good jobs mostly Lena Olin, who plays the mother, who creates a character filled with grief of a past that she is ashamed of, and she creates a character by the end we sympathize with.

Consensus: I feel like this film could’ve been a whole lot better than it actually was, but features some great suspense to a film that just doesn’t have the message that could’ve saved this film.

5/10=Rentall!!!

Ek is verlief op baie mense, maar ek wil hulle nooit ontmoet nie, en in die gevalle waar hulle dood is, sou ek nooit wou nie. Dit is veraf beelde vir my.

Sensualiteit en erotika gaan vir my oor grense heen – die verwysingsraamwerk wat vir my mooi is, word val nie binne bepaalde norme nie. Ek bepaal self wat ek van hou.

Ek is verlief op Cathrine Deneuve, hoe ouer sy word hoe meer verstommend, asemrowend raak sy. Die vol Franse films waarin sy speel spreek van haar. Sy gryp jou aan of jy wil of nie.

Ek was nog altyd verlief op Marlene Dietrich, op haar films, haar musiek, rokerige stem, enigmatiese en moeilike persoonlikheid en deursettingsvermoë gedurende WW II – toe sy die Nazi’s ‘n vinger gewys het.

Haar “sense of style and fashion” – sy was na alles die eerste vrou wat die broekpak mode gemaak het in die 1930’s. En steeds bly sy die een vrou wat goed lyk met ‘n sigaret.

Hoe ouer Denzil Washington word, hoe meer raak ek verlief op hom. Mens hoor nooit dat hy betrokke is in Hollywood se smet nie. Baie sexy man.

Die dag toe Lena Olin met ‘n bolkuil voor die spieël – wat in skerwe was – gestaan het in The Unbearable Lightness of Being byna 20 jaar gelede, toe ek die fliek gesien het, het ek op haar verlief geraak. Sedertdien het my gevoel vir haar niks getaan nie. Sy speel in flieks wat ‘n mens emosioneel uitdaag.

Ava Gardner was die mees ongoddelik mooiste vrou op aarde – ooit. Ek bedoel soos in, daar was en is nog nooit so ‘n pragtige mens nie. Gaan kyk net ‘n bietjie op Google images na haar, of probeer ‘n fliek kry. Jy het nog nie so iets gesien nie. As jy nie op haar verlief is nie, gaan praat met iemand daaroor!

Ek is verlief op Kristen Scott Thomas en Ralph Fiennes, beide het net daai iets, daai spesiale iets wat hulle so aantreklik maak. En toe hulle saam in The English Patient was . . . Fiennes is tot vir my nice as hy evil karakters speel. Veral as hy evil is.

Ek is verlief op Desmond Tutu se guts, die manier waarop hy se wat in sy hart is en nie wat hy “dink ander wil hoor nie”. Ek is verlief op die man, die mens, die leier, die ware gelowige – as net 10% van ons leiers so is, sal die wêreld ‘n beter plek wees. Ek is verlief op sy hart, sy brein, sy verstand, sy sin vir humor, sy mensch-wees en sy respek vir homself en ander.

Ek is al jare des jare verlief op Daniël Day Lewis – die mooiste man op aarde. Ook die beste akteur.

So, op wie is julle almal verlief? Hmmm? Behalwe julle ander helftes, ons weet dit.

While I was writing my previous post, I was thinking about who everyone would be the better Akasha, Amy Lee or May Hariri? I already know that I’m torn between both. Anyway, I just made this poll to see what other people thought.

The Perfect Person for Akasha
(polls)

Because of my Robert Downing Jr. post, that made me think about who would I want for my ideal Vampire Chronicles cast. My ideal person for Lestat, aka the Brat Prince, would have to be Cam Gigandet. I think he would be perfect because he can pull off being blond and being a badass. Keep in mind that I’m basing my opinions on his performance in Twilight. For Louis, I would choose Jonathan Rhys Meyers. For him, it’s just based on looks. Well, actually, most of the people that I chose, if not all, I chose them because of their looks. And for some of them, I also chose them because I think they could that character well. Although with Angelina Jolie as Merrick, I was just thinking of someone who was beautiful and that can play a sex kitten. Anyway, I’m going to put a list of the characters and who I think should play them. I will also put a link to my photo album of the respective people. And a little side note: the characters where I have two people as that character, I could see either one play that character. The only exception would be David. And if you’re a Vampire Chronicles fan, you’ll know why. Oh, and the music for the video was supposed to Maharet from Queen Of The Damned – The Score Album.

Lestat = Cam Gigandet
Louis = Jonathan Rhys Meyers
Claudia = Rachel Covey
Armand = Jaime Campbell Bower
Marius = Daniel Craig
Maharet/Mekare = Nicole Kidman/Julianne Moore
Pandora = Monica Belluci
David = Christopher Lee (old), Sendhil Ramamurthy (young)
Daniel = Jude Law
Gabrielle = Michelle Pfeiffer/Nicole Kidman
Magnus = Peter Facinelli
Nicolas = Emile Hirsch
Jesse = Amy Adams
Mael = Alexander Skarsgård
Khayman = Khalid Abdalla
Akasha = Amy Lee/May Hariri
Enkil = Oded Fehr
Eric = Ian Somerhalder
Santino = Aidan Turner
Bianca = Ivanka Trump
Thorne = Henrik Norlén
Aaron Lightner = Joss Ackland
Merrick = Angelina Jolie
Tarquin = Jared Padalecki

As I said in my previous post, I heard about the rumors surrounding Universal making a Vampire Chronicles movie and the possibility of Robert Downing Jr. being Lestat. My feelings on the Robert Downing Jr. rumors are pretty much neutral. On one hand, he doesn’t really match Lestat’s physical description. For one thing, he’s too old and I don’t know if he can pull off being blond. Anyway, on the other hand, I have never seem any of his movies. So, I can’t really judge him on whether or not he can pull off Lestat’s personality. Anyway, all I can say is that if the Vampire Chronicles and Robert Downing Jr. rumors are true, Robert Downing Jr. had better realize that he better live up to the role that is Lestat.

A few days after my 21st birthday, I read a myspace blog saying that Universal Pictures might be producing a Vampire Chronicles movie. In regards to this news, there are several things that I want to to talk about. Number one: the rumors. I hope the rumors are true about a Vampire Chronicles movie being made. It’s about time. It’s been about seven years since Queen of the Damned and 15 years since Interview with the Vampire. The second thing: if the rumors are true, which book would be made into a movie? It had better not be Interview with the Vampire because I don’t think that it needs to be remade. Queen of the Damned, on the other hand, should be remade. Like I said in my previous post, Queen of the Damned was crap. Anyway, the third thing would be who would play the characters like Lestat, Louis, Gabrielle, etc. I’ll get to the rumors of Robert Downing Jr. possibly as Lestat in my next post. Anyway, I hope that the rumors are true and that a new Vampire Chronicles movie will come out.