Interview with the Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips
Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 4 of 42: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [Next]
Index 415 reviews in total 

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

The BEST Vampire Film Since "Bram Stoker's Dracula." Tom Cruise At His Malevolent Best. AWESOME CAST.

Author: D S from United States
4 October 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Having not read the novel by Anne Rice, I went into the film only knowing the reviews from the movie. I LOVED it. Tom Cruise, typecast as a pretty boy, plays against type as the villainous, yet still likable, Lestat...and what an extraordinary performance. Brad Pitt, fresh off his debut in "Thelma And Louise," is excellent as Louis. Stephen Rea was pure evil as Santiago. Antonio Banderas provides an excellent counter-part to Lestat and Louis' mentor as Armand, proprietor of Theatre De Vampires. Kirsten Dunst, in one of her first films, is truly angelic as Claudia. Christian Slater, brought in to replace the deceased River Phoenix (who had originally been cast, but died of a drug overdose before his part could be filmed), is credible as The Interviewer. Great film. Tom Cruise steals the movie, though he's on screen for less than half the film's running time. Brad Pitt, Kirsten Dunst, Stephen Rea, Antonio Banderas and Christian Slater also carry the film. Well-done period/vampire movie.

SPOILER ALERT! If you don't mind watching vampires biting people's necks, necks being broken, throats slit, bodies cut in half, blood being sucked and brief, but necessary, nudity (when Claudia says, "I want to be just like her" and later in the Theatre De Vampires), this is the movie for you. SPOILERS OVER! More violent than "Bram Stoker's Dracula," but very tame compared to recent films like "Hannibal." Rated PG for vampire violence throughout and brief nudity

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A dark tale of vamps

Author: ToxicChic1994 from United States
29 September 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is my favorite movie ever! Claudia and Louis in this film are my favorite vampires! Well almost, my favorite vampire is Spike from Buffy The Vampire Slayer....But ANYWAY.....

Very good film! It's very dark, yet very interesting. I've never saw a movie with such emotion.The costumes are wonderfully good too.

Kirsten Dunst as Claudia was wonderful! She mastered it completely! She showed emotion SO well!

Brad Pitt was very very good as Louis! I love the fact that he hated himself for being a vampire. Without him, this movie wouldn't be nearly as good!

And Tom Cruise,was excellent as Lestat! Every time he talked,you could just feel the creepiness in the air! All in all, This movie is a MUST watch .

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

The best novel to screen presentation I've ever seen

Author: wnterstar from United States
20 April 2006

I am a big Vampire Chronicles fan. Anne Rice has given us a wonderfully different view of the vampire...the vampire as the protagonist, the hero. I read each and every one of her books as soon as they came out. I was a little concerned when they announced that they were making a movie of the book.

Then I heard that they were casting Tom Cruise as Lestat. Well, that was plain wrong to me...the brunette Cruise, playing the blonde Lestat? Then I heard the blonde Brad Pitt was going to play the dark haired Louis...again....wrong!!! I decided that I was going to see it anyway. I was pleasantly surprised when Tom Cruise brought Lestat to life just the way I pictured him. And Brad Pitt makes you care about Louis and what he has become.

The rest of the cast was well done, too, with stand out performances from Kirsten Dunst as Claudia, and Antonio Banderas as Armand.

This, plus the extraordinary cinematography and musical score make this movie a 9 for me.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

The Vampire, Louis, Tells the story of his life to a young reporter

Author: Julie from USA
23 June 2004

Interview with The Vampire is a spectacular movie full of complex emotions that are fabulously portrayed by the actors. Brad Pitt does a wonderful job of playing the vampire Louis, who is meant to be "an immortal with a mortal's passion". While Pitt carries the main role well, the movie is all the more accentuated by Tom Cruise as the dark-humored vampire Lestat and Kirsten Dunst as the forever-young vampire Claudia. The movie is not intended to be a horror, however. It is more of a documentary of emotions. With the loss of Lestat's character about halfway through the story, the film seems to slow down a bit, but the connection to the characters is still quite alive. This movie gives a vivid portrayal of Louis's story, whether its in the eyes of a faithful Anne Rice reader or just an eager movie-goer.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Drink from You and Live Forever? No, I'm Okay!

Author: jmillerdp from United States
5 September 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

*** SPOILERS *** I am reviewing this movie given you have seen it, or don't care to know all of what happens in it.

Tera-gallons of blood = nothing. Brad Pitt's Louis shows up at Christian Slater's apartment to tell him all about his life as a vampire. But, after all of it is over, neither Slater nor we know why we have sat through the interview or the movie, for that matter.

I am guessing that Anne Rice's novels are mostly circle-jerks like this one. A full story of vampires, killings, grousing about being vampires, etc., with no reason for it.

After the initial gory proceedings calm down a little, you begin to think that this could end up being an entertaining story about a family, even though a very macabre one. But, about three-quarters of the way through, that is stopped, and it becomes just a lot of revenge and killing. You end up feeling more tortured about going through it than Louis does.

Then, the final scene is just a standard "shock" ending, like in a "Friday the 13th" movie.

I really only sat through it because it seems fairly well regarded, and I have kind of run out of movies to watch. This one I could have passed on.

**** (4 out of 10 Stars)

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

why do vampires have to whine so much?

Author: BWMonkey from Boston, MA
28 March 2004

i read the book, liked it okay and then saw the movie. overall, i liked it. it was a welcome change to the usual portrayal of vampires as pure evil, spawned from the devil and with a lot of religious aspects to it. anne rice made her vampires enjoyable and easy to believe in. unfortunately, louis (brad pitt) is a terminal whiner.

i preferred lestat, loathe though i am to say that i liked tom cruise. brad pitt just annoyed me and i kept wishing he would come to terms with the fact that he now has to drink blood to stay happy and functional. the star of the show was, by far, young kirsten dunst as claudia. as the film progressed, she gave the impression of maturing and adulthood, even though her appearance never altered.

this movie was fairly close to the book, mostly just leaving things out rather than changing them completely. it was far too melodramaitc for my taste, however. why can't vampires just be? by do they have to talk with a lot of dramatic pauses and look at you with smouldering eyes? can't they just be? that, of course, is a personal preference.

not a bad movie. good to see with friends, especially when you like to poke fun a the characters. my specialty.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

Bland film with only one noteworthy performance

Author: Pat McCurry ( from Wilton, NH
27 June 1999

This movie is long, depressing, and I was waiting for it to end. Tom Cruise is disappointing as Lastat, and his adaptation was lame. This movie was good until the last 30 minutes. The only person I found convincing was Brad Pitt. He played Louis with so much conviction. You could feel the pain Louis was feeling.All in all though, it was a lame movie that keep going on and on and on. My sister rented the movie to watch, and she let me watch it first. When I told her what I thought of it, she returned it to the video store. Good move, sis.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

A vampire tragedy

Author: Tweekums from United Kingdom
2 August 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This film opens in modern day San Francisco as Louis, a man claiming to be a vampire, starts to tell his story to a journalist. His story begins in New Orleans in 1791; Louis is a wealthy plantation owner but he can't get over the loss of his wife and child a year previously. He deliberately puts himself in dangerous situations but rather than getting himself killed he meets the vampire Lestat. Lestat turns Louis into a vampire but he seems no happier and can't bring himself to feed on people; instead he survives by drinking the blood of rodents; something that disgusts Lestat. Eventually he feeds on the housemaid before heading to a plague infected area of New Orleans. Here he bites the young Claudia, Lestat then turns her into a vampire. Louis treats her like a daughter but as the years pass she has difficulties accepting the fact that she will always be a child and eventually takes her revenge on Lestat for turning her into a vampire. Louis and Claudia then travel to the Old World looking for other vampires; what they find isn't what they hoped for.

Vampire films usually centre on those seeking to destroy them of their potential victims so it is interesting to see the story told from the point of view of a vampire. Brad Pitt does a fine job as the emotionally tormented Louis and Tom Cruise is impressive as he plays against type as Lestat. Young Kirsten Dunst is great as Claudia; beautifully portraying the girl who is doomed to never grow up. The story is told in an interesting way and the old New Orleans setting provided plenty of atmosphere. As one would expect from a vampire film there is some bloody violence although less than one might expect. The action is important but not as important as the characters and looking at the question of what it means to be a vampire. Overall this is an impressive film that fans of the vampire genre are likely to enjoy.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

One of the best vampire movies I've ever seen

Author: Filipe Neto from Portugal
1 August 2016

Based on the Anne Rice's novel and with a screenplay adapted by herself, this film tells the story of Lestat and Louis, two vampires with over three hundred years. Directed by Neil Jordan, has the participation of Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise and Kirsten Dunst (as a child). It received two nominations for the Oscar (Best Art Direction, Best Original Score).

This is the film adaptation of one of the greatest horror novels of this American author, and is even more appealing when we realize that she actively collaborated with the production, signing the adaptation of the script. Indeed, it's a great script, faithful to the novel and original story. And for me, this movie has another good note: fully escaping the recent "sex symbol vampire" cliché, fueled by movies like "Twilight", this film depicts vampires as they really should be: monsters with some psychological depth.

The actors are excellent in their roles. The highlight goes obviously to Pitt and Cruise, who were not only perfectly able to give charisma to the characters but also not ignore the importance of the psychological characteristics. Pitt took it to the extreme in his character, torn between the love of his own humanity and the overwhelming desire for blood he feels. The way both actors share the scene is irresistible, such as how Cruise transforms his character in "evil genius" of his friend.

The film contains several very intense scenes with moments that can hurt some sensibilities. Nevertheless, its not a very bloody movie. The atmosphere is dark, sinister, something largely enhanced by the cinematography, dark and misty, and the soundtrack, worthy of a good horror movie (something that this film is definitely not). The special, visual and sound effects are good, such as the characterization and makeup. The costumes are exceptional, portraying accurately the clothes of the several historical periods portrayed throughout the film.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

The Bite

Author: nojlm from New Orleans, La.
22 June 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

There must always be a bite. It is always the bite that (from my observations) is what gives the audience that "frisson" of chill, even makes them squirm in their seats. There is no "class" to the bite; it must be done efficiently and expeditiously.

Often one has to ask, "Would I have any qualms about doing that?" Lestat would answer something like (this is not a quote from the movie or a novel), "There is no question. You have no choice. The thirst will lead you into it."

What is the best way for a vampire to move in to bite? Evidently, anything goes: To the arm from the wrist up to the elbow, to the throat from the front or over the shoulder, or into the chest or breast seem to be preferred.

Should be victim/prey be taken lying down or held upright?

In many films. the victim struggles and cries aloud before falling unconscious. In "Interview", sometimes this happens. Sometimes, though, the preliminaries to the bite may have the victim being put into a swoon; look at Louis's expression, completely disconnected, as Lestat chomps away.

How should the dentition look? "Interview" has a highly original approach to "the tools of the trade". Instead of the traditional, paired, elongated upper jaw eye teeth, the look is what I would call "piranha", totally.

As for the outcome of the bite itself, without a doubt the rule is "neatness counts". My favorite line relative to this is Lestat's comment to Claudia, "And you didn't spill a single drop."

Google the various images collections from "Interview", and there should be a couple of pictures of an actual dental cast and what appears to be a sculpted, porcelain veneer on top of it.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 4 of 42: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history