No Vampires In The Informers Film?
Has the mention of vampires been removed from The Informers film?
However, Jon Foster who plays Graham, the son of a Hollywood movie exec (Billy Bob Thornton) has made the shocking revelation that there are no creatures from the dead in director Gregor Jordon's upcoming adaptation."There are no more vampires. They took the vampires out. There are no zombies or monsters either," he announces. "This is more about the narcissistic side of people's characters. God knows why they took the vampire characters out. I can't say if I was pleased or displeased, that is just the way it is."
LINK
Comments: 12 (add yours)
Previous Comments
[1] On Mar-25-2008, Alexander wrote:WHY FOR F*CK'S SAKE?!
[2] On Mar-26-2008, stephanie wrote:
WTF?!?!?! Come on, why did they have to take out the vampires? It was creepy, and wierd, and disturbing, and that's what I want for this movie. Something dark. Urgggg. I'm so mad.
[3] On Mar-26-2008, Nathan wrote:
Hmm ...
[4] On Mar-26-2008, stephen wrote:
does this mean 'the secrets of summer' has been entirely removed? cause that would suck! the one scene i was desperately looking forward to seeing on screen was jamie's visit to the psychiatrist.
[5] On Mar-26-2008, dan wrote:
I'm hoping that they're just not calling them "vampires" to avoid being called a vampire movie... might be false hope, but its hard to believe they'd cut out a name actor and entire section of the book completely.
[6] On Mar-29-2008, Jonathan wrote:
That's completely stupid. The vampire story is my favorite one in the book. And I'm not one of those bookworms who deplores movies that stray from their source material. Even from a filmic perspective, removing the vampires makes the movie less cool.
Completely dumb. I hope someone in Hollywood reads this.
[7] On Mar-30-2008, Denny wrote:
Will there ever be a faithful adaptation of any of his books? I doubt it.
I'm hanging on for dear life that Glamorama gets made. And, Lunar Park. That would kick ass.
[8] On Apr-05-2008, mitch wrote:
I knew, I knew...I don't think I going to see this film.
[9] On Apr-05-2008, James wrote:
I would not discount the films the films entirely. I've seen alot of speculation that Brandon Routh will be cut from the film. The most likely scenario is that the Jamie character no longer has the delusion of being a vampire and is instead more obviously just a cannibal. They probably removed super-natural references in order to make sure people were not confused about the plot, and to focus the satire a bit more. It worked in the book, but it makes sense that it was adapated this way. Have faith, Ellis himself co-wrote the screen play os it will probably be faithful, if not improved over the original book in certain ways.
[10] On Apr-06-2008, Niall wrote:
fuck that, this sucks.
[11] On Apr-06-2008, stephanie wrote:
james is right. we shouldn't give up hope on this movie. hey, at least you know its going to be a hundred times better than less than zero's adaption. i mean, BEE fans have definately seen worse adaptions of his books.
[12] On Apr-07-2008, Nathan wrote:
I agree, Stephanie and James. This is no reason to give up on the movie altogether. I wouldn't pass judgment on it till you've seen it. Perhaps the vampire stuff just didn't fit in with the tone of the rest of the film (and perhaps we'll still see that material on a DVD).