User Score
7.8

Generally favorable reviews- based on 181 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 30 out of 181
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. SebastianL.
    Oct 16, 2002
    0
    My condolences to Anne Rice. Interview was halfway acceptable, but this attrocity was uncalled for. Kill the writers. Drink their blood. The only good thing this movie gave us was a new list of songs to make grandmothers scream. Of course my view on this cannot be forsaken, because I am not the only one...
  2. FordP.
    Nov 20, 2004
    0
    This is the worst desplay of Anne Rice's novel that could have happened...I mean come one, it didn't even follow the novel AT ALL!...ok, it did SOME but the percentage that did follow it was way to small to even let it count. Most of the begining didn't even happen in Queen of the Damned but in The Vampire Lestat...Marius didn't make Lestat, it was Magnus...Marius This is the worst desplay of Anne Rice's novel that could have happened...I mean come one, it didn't even follow the novel AT ALL!...ok, it did SOME but the percentage that did follow it was way to small to even let it count. Most of the begining didn't even happen in Queen of the Damned but in The Vampire Lestat...Marius didn't make Lestat, it was Magnus...Marius didn't find Lestat until he was at least 100 years old. He was not mae on some distant island but just outside Paris. The guy who play Louis is SO UGLY!, I cringe every time I see him. According to Anne Rice all vempires are the most beautiful people in the world. Akasha is white, and NOT black...I just have no more to say about it cause it just makes me mad....anyone who would rather watch the movie is an idiot. I can't stand the fact that the paperback now has the picture of that damn movie on it...At least the "Interview with the Vamipre" had some things right with the book... All I have left to say is, I'm so sorry Anne Rice...Sorry that Scott Abbott did such a horrible job of making the movie. Expand
  3. NathanH.
    Mar 1, 2002
    1
    Good lord, this movie was abysmal. I'm generally willing to give this genre a lot of slack, but halfway though the movie I found myself interchanging between looking longingly at the exit and trying to stab myself in the head with my drink straw in a vain attempt to put me out of such misery.
  4. JuriP.
    Mar 4, 2002
    2
    I was horrified that Anne Rice would allow this film to be made! The first film, "Interview . . .", was INCREDIBLE! "Queen.." was SO disappointing. The screen writers left out too many details and storyline essentials that it should not even be called by the same name as the book. And unlike Interview, Queen did NOT integrate information from other books as well. HORRIBLE!
  5. TinaRB
    Jan 5, 2009
    2
    I'm trying to think about anyhing good about this movie. But I can't come up with anything. maybe the violin scene. The film is quite pathetic, far far aways from the book. Like a You tube spoof version of the book.
  6. Akane1412
    Apr 7, 2009
    1
    As a great Anne Rice fan, watching this movie made me so mad.... The first time I watched it, I hadn't yet read the book and I hated it. Thought it made no sense and that the lack of Louis and how Lestat acted and looked seemed to have nothing to do with the movie I had loved, "Interview with the vampire" made it hard for me to believe it was connected at all... Once I read the book As a great Anne Rice fan, watching this movie made me so mad.... The first time I watched it, I hadn't yet read the book and I hated it. Thought it made no sense and that the lack of Louis and how Lestat acted and looked seemed to have nothing to do with the movie I had loved, "Interview with the vampire" made it hard for me to believe it was connected at all... Once I read the book and wanted to re-watch the movie ... big mistake. I hated it even more than ever before. I was shocked that apparently the one to make Lestat had been Marius, that Jesse or whatever seemed to have taken over Louis role, that Marius looked like an uggly 40 years old soldier or something. That hair... gah. Armand had like 2 minutes of screen play and one sentence without any reference at all ever to his name. It's like he never existed even... and worse of all, what really killed it for me... The violin had belonged to a gipsy girl? WTF? Were they just denning Lestat's love? Or is it just that Nicholas didn't deserve any mention at all? I was hurt. I love Nicholas and I was offended, it's like Queen of the damned and The vampire Lestat are all about straight vampires or something. Seriously, change the hair of characters, reduce their role... whatever, that happens with movies. But to act as if a certain character never existed and replace him? I hate that. It's not even like Nicholas was a small character on The vampire Lestat... Gah, worst movie I ever watched. Even refused to buy the DVD at damn cheap price months ago... I don't want anything to do with that thing. Expand
  7. BrianaL.
    Oct 12, 2002
    0
    After being a fan for many years, I was absolutly disgusted by this film! Six years ago, all of Anne Rice's fans where up in arms about Tom Cruise playing Lestat, but I have to say, if they couldn't haven't gotten Tom back there shouldn't have been another movie. This Stuart Townsend guy is just plain awful! While young and relatively good looking, he possesses neither After being a fan for many years, I was absolutly disgusted by this film! Six years ago, all of Anne Rice's fans where up in arms about Tom Cruise playing Lestat, but I have to say, if they couldn't haven't gotten Tom back there shouldn't have been another movie. This Stuart Townsend guy is just plain awful! While young and relatively good looking, he possesses neither the arrogance or the attitude to portray such a charismatic character as Lestat. Nothing about the movie was right, absolutly nothing. In my opinion, this was a sad and disappointing waste of money and time. Expand
  8. AngelaG.
    Nov 6, 2002
    3
    I am an avid fan of Anne Rice and some fans had quiet a bit to say about how "Interview" didnt live up to the book. If that is so, then "Queen" didn't even come from the same universe. The movie doesn't even make any sense. I spent much of the movie time having to explain to my companion what was supposed to be going on, based on the book. It is as if the book had been thrown I am an avid fan of Anne Rice and some fans had quiet a bit to say about how "Interview" didnt live up to the book. If that is so, then "Queen" didn't even come from the same universe. The movie doesn't even make any sense. I spent much of the movie time having to explain to my companion what was supposed to be going on, based on the book. It is as if the book had been thrown into a blender with all the other chronicles and a hefty helping of B movies, then poured into one big let down for Rice's fans. Expand
  9. AnthonyT.
    Feb 24, 2002
    3
    This movie, if you are talking about accuracy to the series, SUCKS. If you are talking as a movie itself, it was pretty good. It should not have been given the same name as the book if it was going to incorporate more than one. It BUTCHERED the story line. That is all.
  10. DiannaN.
    Sep 1, 2002
    1
    WASTE OF TIME!! I can't imagine that Anne Rice had anything to do with this film. They didn't follow the story, and now can't even follow any of the other Vampire stories without screwing it up as bad as this one! "Interview with the Vampire" was great, what the hell went wrong with this one? And Lestat is supposed to be beautiful... which he is clearly NOT in "Queen of the WASTE OF TIME!! I can't imagine that Anne Rice had anything to do with this film. They didn't follow the story, and now can't even follow any of the other Vampire stories without screwing it up as bad as this one! "Interview with the Vampire" was great, what the hell went wrong with this one? And Lestat is supposed to be beautiful... which he is clearly NOT in "Queen of the Damned." I am SO disappointed, as any Anne Rice fan should be. If there is another movie based on an Anne Rice book, it is going to take some hard-core convincing to get me to watch. Expand
  11. AnnaB.
    Mar 14, 2003
    1
    This movie really sucked the book is much better, and please Lestat has blond hair not black. it did not have enough details.
  12. CarrieC.
    Oct 16, 2002
    2
    This movie had almost nothing to do with the actual "queen". It greatly disappointed me. Not enough killing, and not enough plot.
  13. AndrewG.
    Feb 25, 2002
    3
    I'm no middle aged critic, and I thought this movie had hardly any redeeming qualities about it. Playing too much off the tired goth/nu-metal nuance for success, it brings the story across in a jumbled mess. The focus on interview with a vampire, and largely what made it a more charming film, was the focus on the characters. On queen of the damned, the characters seem to be made aI'm no middle aged critic, and I thought this movie had hardly any redeeming qualities about it. Playing too much off the tired goth/nu-metal nuance for success, it brings the story across in a jumbled mess. The focus on interview with a vampire, and largely what made it a more charming film, was the focus on the characters. On queen of the damned, the characters seem to be made a mockery of. Aaliyah is/was by no means a good actress. Stuart townsend was a very weak Lestat. Maurius was nothing more than a second thought. The only character that seemed the least bit interesting was the "older" female vampire, and she was in the movie for about 7 minutes total. There WAS no point to this movie, unless the point of the movie was to help fuel the sales of Korn's next release. Expand
  14. Richard
    Aug 28, 2002
    3
    Mostly a travesty. "The Queen of the Damned" is a complex read and would have made a fascinating film, but the creators went the camp route instead to the detriment of what makes the material interesting. Vincent Perez makes a good Marius, but Stuart Townsend mistakes preening for acting. The finale is too rushed and the death of Aaliyah, under the circumstances, is wince-worthy.
  15. MattC.
    Dec 16, 2003
    0
    I hate to be so critical, however who was right in their parts? Anyone?..It was soooo camp it was laughable. I know I'm being critical but Anne Rice was so critical of Tom Cruise as Lestat, where were her comments on Townsend and the rest of the cast, let alone the hideous script which was so muddled it never actually made sence. I would certainly echo "Luz C" comments but with a I hate to be so critical, however who was right in their parts? Anyone?..It was soooo camp it was laughable. I know I'm being critical but Anne Rice was so critical of Tom Cruise as Lestat, where were her comments on Townsend and the rest of the cast, let alone the hideous script which was so muddled it never actually made sence. I would certainly echo "Luz C" comments but with a much lower rating. If you name a movie after a book you have a great respocibility to the people who are fans. Ya just shouldn't care about a buck....THIS MOVIE WAS TRASH with no redeemable qualities whatsoever. Expand
  16. O.S.
    Mar 31, 2003
    1
    I have to agree with Anne B, a lot of important parts and characters out; and Lestat (as I remember) was not made by Marius, i give this a rate of 1, only...because unlike interview... Armand looks more like he is described in the book... though he should have had a bigger role in the movie.
  17. ValR.
    Apr 16, 2003
    2
    Coming from a true horror/gore fan, this movie really disappointed me. I myself am captivated on the world of vampires but this movie just sucked. The title is "Queen of the Damned" not "Lestat of the Damned" and it really should have revolved more around her not him in general. She is the mother of all vampires not him. Also, will there ever be a descent horror movie made? Today's Coming from a true horror/gore fan, this movie really disappointed me. I myself am captivated on the world of vampires but this movie just sucked. The title is "Queen of the Damned" not "Lestat of the Damned" and it really should have revolved more around her not him in general. She is the mother of all vampires not him. Also, will there ever be a descent horror movie made? Today's horror genre is at it's worst and really needs to be saved. Expand
  18. Alex
    Feb 29, 2004
    3
    Utterly dissapointing. I, too, have read the novels and have many the same feelings of you other Ricean fans. I only feel obligated to give it 3 points because people who have not read the books can actually enjoy the movie. But I could not enjoy the movie because the whole thing was jumbled. So much was wrong about the damned movie, you'd think the people who wrote the script were Utterly dissapointing. I, too, have read the novels and have many the same feelings of you other Ricean fans. I only feel obligated to give it 3 points because people who have not read the books can actually enjoy the movie. But I could not enjoy the movie because the whole thing was jumbled. So much was wrong about the damned movie, you'd think the people who wrote the script were just trying to write a whole new story! It was so annoying. Every 5 minutes I was finding another thing wrong with the movie that annoyed the hell out of me. It was so unlike the book. My friends and i could have made a movie that was more like the book. And the fact that they would actually attempt to combine these two great stories into this one horrific movie reallllly bothers me. Now you've all heard all the nonsense, and all the things that were wrong in this movie, and I'm not going to go on about those, even though I am sure some of them have been overlooked. This movie did not do the book justice whatsoever. To all you people who complained that Interview With The Vampire did not live up to the book... well, I'm sure your comments on this movie are by far worse. At least Interview With The Vampire went somewhat by the storyline. Sure it left out a lot, but it was not as bad a pile as QOTD. I never plan on seeing this movie again, and I feel very unfortunate to have had to. And personally, I think Aaliyah did an okay job as Akasha. But still, this movie wasn't worthy whatsoever. TOTAL flop. Expand
  19. SaerA.
    Mar 21, 2004
    0
    The is the worst movie ever. Aaliyah has the leading role but a very short role.While the movie was going on I have been waiting for Aaliyah to show up.I feel so bad for her for doing this movie.
  20. HarleyD
    Sep 13, 2007
    2
    If you've read the book, which judging from your comments i'm assuming most of you haven't, you'll understand why this movie was an utter disgrace, not only to the Vampire Chronicles, but to vampire movies in general. Especially considering they completely cut Maharet's sister from the movie when she had the key role in the end. The writers completely messed up If you've read the book, which judging from your comments i'm assuming most of you haven't, you'll understand why this movie was an utter disgrace, not only to the Vampire Chronicles, but to vampire movies in general. Especially considering they completely cut Maharet's sister from the movie when she had the key role in the end. The writers completely messed up the story, and strayed from the book itself. Sure there may have been parts in the movie that were similar to the book, but in the long run, it was pathetic. and not to mention the characters in the end that ended up killing Akasha were strangers to the movie and made no sense what so ever. leaving out so much of what i feel the need to say, this movie was CRAP. Expand
  21. GermanB
    Nov 21, 2008
    2
    The movie by itself was not bad, yet it was an insult to Anne Rice's vampire chronicles. The storyline was messed up, the main character story was almost completely changed, and as a final shallow comment, the vampire Lestat has thick blond hair and not brownish as the actor on the film. I liked it as a film, but I hated it, and still hate it.
  22. May 28, 2012
    2
    This is a delightfully horrendous B movie. I was awaiting the appearance of Bruce Campbell the entire time. Unfortunately, he doesn't show up...maybe in the sequel.
  23. Jul 12, 2013
    0
    well.. just re-read the novel again after a long time after my first book of it got caught in the house fire.. and.. still.. I am extremely upset on how the movie went.. How I wish there was a remake of this with the characters "SOMEHOW" even matching of those in the Book.. seems like the only things they got right here are the names of the characters.. But not their soul or theirwell.. just re-read the novel again after a long time after my first book of it got caught in the house fire.. and.. still.. I am extremely upset on how the movie went.. How I wish there was a remake of this with the characters "SOMEHOW" even matching of those in the Book.. seems like the only things they got right here are the names of the characters.. But not their soul or their characteristic at all.. **sigh** so sad.. If I were Anne Rice, I'd send the makers of the movie in jail for ruining 1 of the best masterpiece ever.. Expand
Metascore
30

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 31 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 31
  2. Negative: 14 out of 31
  1. Leaves us puzzled as to why the term "damned" applies at all, when vampirism is depicted as so cool, fashion-savvy and glamorous.
  2. At its best, Queen is campy fun like the Vincent Price horror classics of the '60s. At its worst, it implodes in a series of very bad special effects.
  3. 20
    "Queen" is a movie that stoops to jokes like calling Lestat's CD "a monster hit"; the movie is just a plain old monster.