|Page 6 of 42:||               |
|Index||411 reviews in total|
This movie is really a great horror drama. The director did a great job
and it has a wonderful cast who all perform their roles to near
perfection. Although about vampires I would have to say this is more of
a drama with a lot of elements of romance in there as well. This movie
really does have something for everyone and it definitely suck you into
This movie is about a vampire who wants to tell a journalist his life story. The journalist does not believe him at first but he begins to get more and more intrigued as the story goes on.
This is one of the best vampire films ever made and despite the fact its not scary it still is very well done and very interesting. The great cast really makes the whole thing come together.
I recall this film terrifying me as a child. As an adult, it is even
more frightening. It's neither the vampires that necessarily scare you
nor the scenes of gushing blood nor the darkness, but the sprawling
narrative itself - a journey through an alternative history where
monsters, magic and immorality intersect. A journey which begins in the
small port city of New Orleans and traverses to Europe and ends back in
the New World. Despite the epic nature of it all, Rice writes an
intimate and personal story where the emotions of love, betrayal and
uncertainty are at the forefront, especially evident in the tragic
depictions of Louis and Claudia and the ruthless cunning of Lestat. You
root for the protagonist, Louis, wanting him desperately to protect his
daughter/friend/partner Claudia and at the same time find his own
salvation. The emotions towards Lestat are more mixed; he certainly is
the heel but moments exist where a deeply sympathetic and tortured
person is sown. Then Rice keenly without compromising the integrity of
the story introduces the underbelly of the vampire society a pleasant
shift midway through the film.
This is a special story. When you add the highly competent acting, this becomes possibly the best horror flick ever made.
With its photogenic cast and a story-line revolving around the
emotional anguish that goes hand in hand with vampirism, Interview With
The Vampire could be accused of being the 90s precursor to Twilight;
its vamps might be sad, however, but they sure ain't sappy: the vampire
Lestat (Tom Cruise) would happily tear Edward a new one; Claudia
(Kirsten Dunst) would rip out Bella's throat without batting an eyelid;
Louis (Brad Pitt) would find it hard to join in at first, but his
hunger would prevail. That's because Interview With The Vampire is a
proper vampire movie with proper vamps designed for a mature audience,
not watered down PG-13 tripe aimed at the less discriminate teen
Interview's bloodsuckers might have emotional issues to deal withimmortality and a constant craving for blood doesn't come without its baggagebut when it comes down to it, these guys see mortals as food and having a relationship with dinner is only going to get messy (much better to slash their throat and be done with it); Interview's brutal bloodsuckers (and its R-rating) ensure that viewers get a healthy helping of gore to go with their Gothic romanticism, Stan Winston's incredible effects giving the film plenty of bite. Factor in excellent direction from Neil Jordan and great turns from its stars (Dunst is amazing for her age), and what you have is a terrific vampiric horror in the truest sense.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
i too was very upset when first hearing that Lestat was to be played by Tom Cruise - and even more upset that he played the part so well - thank you for that insight to his ego - which makes sense now why he fit the role so well... i also agree that Antonio Banderas was too old for the 17yoBoy|millenia_olde_vampyre out of touch with current trends, but also feel that (though Kristen Dunst did well) she too was too old for the part she was supposed to play - read the book again shes is a few years off the mark but then again there probably aren't that many kids that could have played a role that young. As for Brad Pitt, i have always felt he was a pretty boy who had some skill at acting - but little to no substance - now many years later i can really appreciate that some of the early roles he played were for notoriety and money - until he could pick and choose the films he wants to play w/o fear of being typecast.
Interview with the vampire is by far my all time favorite movie. With outstanding acting, effects, and writing. Tom Cruise proves he can act with the best of them when he takes on the right material. Cruise gives a devilish performance as the monstrous Lestat. Brad Pitt, Kirsten Dunst, Antonio Banderas, and Christian Slater are excellent. This movie delves deep into the truth behind a vampire's fierce eyes and pale skin. This film makes you see things from the point-of-view of a character normally portrayed as the heartless villain. this film should have received more recognition by the Academy than just two nominations. Cruise and Dunst should have received nominations for their performances as Lestat and Claudia. The Writing, Make-up Effects, Art Direction, and Score are definitely award-worthy. I strongly recommend this film.
I don't really understand why the score for this fantastic film is only
7.2! I'd give it a 10! I like vampires, and in my mind, a vampire film
should be just like this one! Fantastic acting, Gothic atmosphere,
noble but evil-like vampires...you see them ALL in this one!
Beside, the most intriguing part is the loneliness and sadness of vampires. You can feel it in every word that Louis said. We live because we die, so how can one live without death? Just like Lestat said, that's not live, that's survive.
So Louis did. He was only surviving, in mourning for his lost love.
Compared with Dracula by Francis Ford Coppola, I think Interview With A Vampire is more like a fairy tale, dark and sad though.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Plot: The plot is based on the novel by Anne Rice (actually the first
book in the Vampire Chronicles) and takes a different approach to
illustrating Vampires; here we are told the story from a Vampire's
point of view (although it's a disgruntled Vampire's point of view).
The Vampire Louis is 'made' in 1791 by another Vampire; Lestat; who
takes pity (for lack of better word) on the young man who is very
disgruntled with his current life, not that the transition into Vampire
does anything to that view. This adaptation is one of the best I have
had the pleasure to see, it does have its alterations but since Anne
Rice herself as had a hand in the adaptation they don't impact the
adaptation that much. I can't find anything that I can say destroys my
impression of the book, there are of cause minor points but they don't
ruin the flow or experience of my mental picture of the scenes (in fact
some of them I didn't even realize). Now I have to say that this isn't
my favorite book in the series but indeed a great one.
Actors: The actors do a magnificent job at portraying their various characters and are mostly well cast. Tom Cruise does portray Lestat de Lioncourt with just the right amount of darkness and emotional lacking that is conveyed in the novel, but he still does not fit with my picture of Lestat, this however is not any failing of Tom, but rather on the casting (just to clarify, the casters would have been hard set to find anyone else that could have played the role of Lestat this good). Brad Pitt is almost perfectly cast as Louis de Pointe du Lac, he portrays the character with just the right amount of disgruntlement and unhappiness that is central to the character. I find this role more his breakthrough than the one he actually became known from. Antonio Banderas portrays Armand with the right kind of passion and joy at finding this 'new' Vampire to teach and spend time with. You also get the feeling that he's missing something in his unlife (now I won't spoil it if you haven't read the Vampire Chronicles, but that portray is right on Armand). Stephen Rea portrays Santiago just as perfectly as the rest of the actors do theirs. Santiago isn't one of the greatest roles in the novel but still an important one and Stephen nails it. Santiago is himself an actor and playwright and one who follows the rules of the Vampires to the letter, and this is conveyed perfectly by Stephen. Kirsten Dunst is adorably as Claudia, the Child Vampire. She truly acts with a great understanding of the character (remarkably considering her age at the time) and the emotions that anybody would have in a situation such as Claudia's. Christian Slater portrays Daniel Malloy with enough uneasiness that he doesn't fall flat on his face but his is the least of the performances, but given that this is probably the least explained (fleshed out) characters in the novel (he's gets his due later in the series) he does a good enough job.
Effects: Big applause to Stan Winston for the Vampire effects, they're just stunning, as is the burning of New Orleans (which is mostly computer generated since the city of New Orleans wouldn't let the filmmakers use any pyrotechnics, and who can blame them?). The sets and clothing also fits nicely with the Victorian age.
Overall: Well as I said this is one of the best adaptations I have seen (it even takes into account some of the later revelations in the series). I have a hard time finding anything bad to say about it; the only thing I can come up with is that I think that Stuart Townsend (Queen of the Damned) is a better Lestat than Tom Cruise. I give this movie 8 out of 10. The extra material on the DVD doesn't give much but a nice anyway, the commentary by the director is nice enough but I miss someone else that he could discuss the scenes with, the making of is also interesting but these two extras isn't enough to satisfy me.
i love vampires no matter who plays them, even the old ghetto version of old Dracula is awesome, not all vampires have to be hot, some look like normal people and weather or not they want you around is how often you notice them. i am 18, my name is Meaghan and i have been called everything from a wiccan (or as some say a witch) to a vampire in my few years of being here but i also need to put a couple people straight. for one: vampires drink blood and need it to servive. two: they can range from being sexy to being as ugly as hell (i know because one of my friend's swears he's one and can prove it too). and for three: there might be laws to the underworld but there are soo many ways around them. i believe that people need to hear my opinion so here it is. interview with the vampire was an awesome inspirational movie that shows how hard it is to live as a vampire. so there...
This piece is one of a master, simply blending the Gothic ancient romance of Anne Rice's work with the boldness of update film-making. Though, however, ones picture of the Vampire Lestat can never be matched after reading six hundred pages telling of his abnormal beauty and sex-appeal, Tom Cruise takes a good shot at trying. There is always a wish for more, when you know the book behind a picture, and I must say I would'nt mind one or tree hours more of this tantalizing tale. I love the costumes, love the light, love the environments and the beautiful actors. (Off the record I'm not a fan of Kirsten Dunst's, and I might say that this is one of her best performances, especially regarding to her age at that time.) Closing up to say, if you ever feel like candy in the shape of a motion picture, this is The One.
"Let me kiss it better."
I am not one who generally likes Vampire films in fact the only one before Interview With the Vampire was the original Dracula film with Bela Lugosi. And yet I just really loved Interview With the Vampire it was extremely well written as was the book and well directed and acted Kirsten Dunst in particular is amazing as Claudia the young Vampire. The plot goes generally like this. A Vampire named Louis is interviewed by a young reporter and he tells his life story a two hundred year long life story. His story starts in the late Seventeen Houndreds in Saint Louis Missouri. He is a depressed man who just lost his wife and child. Than he is bitten by Lestat a Vampire from Paris. Louis refuses to feed on humans and lives off rats and such. Lestat finds this hilarious and taunts him constantly. After moving to Louisiana, Louis can't help himself and attacks a young girl, but Lestat finds him and laughs. Louis runs in self loathing but Lestat finds him and brings him to the dying child. Lestat than makes the child a Vampire and their daughter named Claudia. She is even more bloodthirsty than Lestat and teaches Louis to love again as well to eat human blood. That is the plot that sends Interview With a Vampire into much more stuff and makes it wonderful.
|Page 6 of 42:||               |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Plot keywords||Main details||Your user reviews|
|Your vote history|