LoginTo be honest, it has been a while since I have seen this flick so maybe I should re-watch it at some point. In fact, I remember it very well when it was released. Obviously, River Phoenix was supposed to be there but tragically died before the production started and was subsequently replaced by Christian Slater but it was a rather minor part after all. Above all, back then, there was quite a controversy about the fact that Tom Cruise was to play Lestat and many thought, including the author Anne Rice, that he was a poor choice but, eventually, Cruise was really impressive here, giving one of his best performances. Concerning Brad Pitt, it was one of his biggest projects following his breakthrough in 'Thelma & Louise' and even though he was in fact upstaged by Tom Cruise, he was fine as well here (apparently, Pitt felt miserable during the production and actually wanted to drop out from the whole thing). To round up the cast, you finally had Kirsten Dunst who gave one of the best child performances I have seen launching another really steady career. Concerning the movie itself, to be honest, I think it was still missing something to become really amazing but it was still a really entertaining vampire flick and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.
A good movie
Posted : 8 years, 3 months ago on 30 December 2015 10:41
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Fantastic vampire film!
Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 19 August 2010 02:22
Over the past few years, I have been begged and begged by friends and family to watch this film and now I finally have and now I can see why they have been begging me to watch it! What a brilliant film it turned out to be with a lot of scares and violence which is, after all, what a vampire film is all about (unlike that stupid crap Twilight series). To be honest, I would say that Interview With The Vampire is one of the very few vampire films where they truly show the horror of vampires and what they do.
A night in San Francisco, during our time: A young journalist follows a man through the streets and they end up in an anonymous room. When the journalist starts to interview the man, the stranger tells him that he is a vampire, being over 200 years old. The journalist doesn't believe him, but after the man proves it's true, he tells his story: His name is Louis and in 18th century New Orleans he was 24, by this time owner of an estate and a widower already. One night, when he once again was destroying himself by drinking and other things, he was found by Lestat, a vampire, who bit him. But even after becoming a vampire, life wasn't fun for Louis until one night he met a little girl, Claudia, who should change his existence forever. The acting was absolutely fantastic from everybody in this film! Tom Cruise was just absolutely amazing as Lestat De Lioncourt! He surprisingly terrified the audiences and made Lestat in Interview With The Vampire one of his best roles as an actor. In fact, I would say that his performance in this film is just as good as his performance was in Magnolia. Brad Pitt was already a role model and had already appeared in Legends Of The Fall the same year Interview With The Vampire was released but this time, Brad goes somewhere a bit darker. Yeah, he is a vampire in this but he's the ''innocent vampire'' so to speak. Kirsten Dunst was just amazing and made a breakthrough in her career just like she did in Jumanji! I would compare Dunst's performance almost as good as Linda Blair's performance in The Exorcist. Despite she got a Golden Globe nomination, she should have earned an Oscar nomination for her role in this film!
Neil Jordan made this film absolutely brilliantly! I mean, most of the time films are set in the Victorian era and just fail but this is a vampire film and it could have been an utter disaster and it really wasn't at all! Only one fault I have with the film was that it seemed like an epic vampire film from the cover and the trailer but it didn't quite feel that way. Interview With The Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles was nominated for two Academy Awards: Best Art Direction and Best Original Score.
Overall, Interview With The Vampire is a terrifying vampire film that was beautifully made and amazingly acted! There needs to be more vampire films like this!!
A night in San Francisco, during our time: A young journalist follows a man through the streets and they end up in an anonymous room. When the journalist starts to interview the man, the stranger tells him that he is a vampire, being over 200 years old. The journalist doesn't believe him, but after the man proves it's true, he tells his story: His name is Louis and in 18th century New Orleans he was 24, by this time owner of an estate and a widower already. One night, when he once again was destroying himself by drinking and other things, he was found by Lestat, a vampire, who bit him. But even after becoming a vampire, life wasn't fun for Louis until one night he met a little girl, Claudia, who should change his existence forever. The acting was absolutely fantastic from everybody in this film! Tom Cruise was just absolutely amazing as Lestat De Lioncourt! He surprisingly terrified the audiences and made Lestat in Interview With The Vampire one of his best roles as an actor. In fact, I would say that his performance in this film is just as good as his performance was in Magnolia. Brad Pitt was already a role model and had already appeared in Legends Of The Fall the same year Interview With The Vampire was released but this time, Brad goes somewhere a bit darker. Yeah, he is a vampire in this but he's the ''innocent vampire'' so to speak. Kirsten Dunst was just amazing and made a breakthrough in her career just like she did in Jumanji! I would compare Dunst's performance almost as good as Linda Blair's performance in The Exorcist. Despite she got a Golden Globe nomination, she should have earned an Oscar nomination for her role in this film!
Neil Jordan made this film absolutely brilliantly! I mean, most of the time films are set in the Victorian era and just fail but this is a vampire film and it could have been an utter disaster and it really wasn't at all! Only one fault I have with the film was that it seemed like an epic vampire film from the cover and the trailer but it didn't quite feel that way. Interview With The Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles was nominated for two Academy Awards: Best Art Direction and Best Original Score.
Overall, Interview With The Vampire is a terrifying vampire film that was beautifully made and amazingly acted! There needs to be more vampire films like this!!
0 comments, Reply to this entry
''God kills indiscriminately and so shall we.''
Posted : 14 years, 4 months ago on 20 December 2009 07:45
''That morning I was not yet a vampire, and I saw my last sunrise. I remember it completely, and yet I can't recall any sunrise before it. I watched its whole magnificence for the last time as if it were the first. And then I said farewell to sun light, and set out to become what I became.''
A vampire named Louis tells his epic life story that covers love, betrayal, loneliness, and hunger.
Brad Pitt: Louis de Pointe du Lac
Tom Cruise: Lestat de Lioncourt
Kirsten Dunst: Claudia
This soulful account of a vampire based on Anne Rice's amazing novel which i have yet to read will always capture and shudder my soul.
The score melts me each time, the supernatural feel, the timeless narration by Brad. Saw this when i was little and it has stayed with me ever since, every viewing it still satisfies me.
Brad pitt as Louis really conveys his conscientious morally sided Vampire who hasn't like his other brethren lost his humanity. He seems to convey not just in his words but in his face a soulful longing and sulky peaceful yearning.
Tom Cruise as Lestat is charged with energy in a performance that really does let Tom go wild and chew up the secnery. His depiction and his performance with the material show what a fang-tastic actor he truly is. Cruise at his peak.
Also Kirsten Dunst as little Claudia shines also, even at her young age you could always tell she was destined for great things.
My best Vampire film along with Bram Stoker's Dracula. A classic in every sense that will haunt you and mesmerize you and make you feel good no matter how many times you watch. Always reach the end satisfied, and its a wondrous feeling.
''Evil is a point of view. God kills indiscriminately and so shall we. For no creatures under God are as we are, none so like him as ourselves.''
A vampire named Louis tells his epic life story that covers love, betrayal, loneliness, and hunger.
Brad Pitt: Louis de Pointe du Lac
Tom Cruise: Lestat de Lioncourt
Kirsten Dunst: Claudia
This soulful account of a vampire based on Anne Rice's amazing novel which i have yet to read will always capture and shudder my soul.
The score melts me each time, the supernatural feel, the timeless narration by Brad. Saw this when i was little and it has stayed with me ever since, every viewing it still satisfies me.
Brad pitt as Louis really conveys his conscientious morally sided Vampire who hasn't like his other brethren lost his humanity. He seems to convey not just in his words but in his face a soulful longing and sulky peaceful yearning.
Tom Cruise as Lestat is charged with energy in a performance that really does let Tom go wild and chew up the secnery. His depiction and his performance with the material show what a fang-tastic actor he truly is. Cruise at his peak.
Also Kirsten Dunst as little Claudia shines also, even at her young age you could always tell she was destined for great things.
My best Vampire film along with Bram Stoker's Dracula. A classic in every sense that will haunt you and mesmerize you and make you feel good no matter how many times you watch. Always reach the end satisfied, and its a wondrous feeling.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Not too bad...
Posted : 16 years ago on 27 April 2008 01:33
"Your body's dying. Pay no attention, It happens to us all."
Vampire horror movies have fascinated me since I first viewed the mother of the genre: that is, F.W. Murnau's Nosferatu. Many have tried but never gotten close to the originality and brilliance of the 1922 German silent picture based on Bram Stoker's Dracula.
With this film, Interview with the Vampire is based on a series of novels by Anne Rice (who also wrote the screenplay for the film). The novels and film alike were widely acclaimed by critics and audience. Unfortunately for me, when I at long last saw this movie I couldn't understand all the ruckus.
The film opens as we are introduced to two characters; one is a radio show host named Daniel (Slater) and the other is a mysterious figure named Louis (Pitt). Louis claims that he is an actual vampire and chooses to share his life story with Daniel.
Naturally, at first Daniel is reluctant to believe Louis' declaration of being a member of the undead. But after a quick demonstration Louis then proceeds to tell his epic tale of love, betrayal, loneliness and hunger; his life of living death that never ends.
A bulk of the story takes place during the 18th Century. Louis is bitten by a vampire named Lestat (Cruise) who becomes his mentor. Initially Louis' attitude towards vampiric activities is negative; but his life is never the same when Lestat brings young Claudia (Dunst) into the equation.
At the outset I thought this film had massive potential to be the next great vampire movie. The acting can't be faulted and the attention to detail is unbelievably meticulous; featuring some gorgeous production design and authentic costumes. But the film is very hard to get into. We're just thrown into a world without knowing anything about the characters. The opening introduction just wasn't enough character development before launching into the story. And throughout the film the filmmakers failed to frequently remind us that it's just a character telling a story. Very rarely do we cut back to the hotel, and too infrequently do we hear voice-over narration.
After the first 50 minutes the film becomes unnecessarily relentless. Things begin getting dull and bleak. And then the film keeps dragging on; becoming increasingly boring. Maybe people who are besotted with vampires could overlook the shallow screenplay.
Like I stated previously, the performances are almost impossible to fault. Tom Cruise sparked controversy when he was cast in the role of Lestat. It took a little while for vampiric Cruise to sink in. He gives it everything he can, but I don't feel that he was right for the role. In fact I find Cruise completely miscast. He has his moments, though.
Brad Pitt shows great versatility in his performance. When his character is an experienced member of the vampire race he is wooden but chilling. His make-up really assisted in this aspect. Back in the 18th Century he seems very reluctant to carry out the duties of a vampire. He expresses emotion quite well while playing this side of his character.
Kirsten Dunst beguiled audiences with a performance that belies her years. The film needed a young actress who could display a range of emotions for different situations. Dunst nailed the role of tragic young Claudia.
The director failed to an extent because the film couldn't engage me. The acting was great but the images were quite dull throughout the movie. The gore is inexorable when the occasion calls for it. Apart from the gory scenes the film had nothing going for it. The drama seemed shallow and is staged appallingly. Maybe if the dialogue was a bit more fascinating (looking at the screenwriter for this flaw) then the film could have been a lot better.
Interview with the Vampire had potential that was spoilt in its execution. Apart from some creative ideas, intriguing imagery and stellar performances the film has little else to offer. Followed by Queen of the Damned.
Vampire horror movies have fascinated me since I first viewed the mother of the genre: that is, F.W. Murnau's Nosferatu. Many have tried but never gotten close to the originality and brilliance of the 1922 German silent picture based on Bram Stoker's Dracula.
With this film, Interview with the Vampire is based on a series of novels by Anne Rice (who also wrote the screenplay for the film). The novels and film alike were widely acclaimed by critics and audience. Unfortunately for me, when I at long last saw this movie I couldn't understand all the ruckus.
The film opens as we are introduced to two characters; one is a radio show host named Daniel (Slater) and the other is a mysterious figure named Louis (Pitt). Louis claims that he is an actual vampire and chooses to share his life story with Daniel.
Naturally, at first Daniel is reluctant to believe Louis' declaration of being a member of the undead. But after a quick demonstration Louis then proceeds to tell his epic tale of love, betrayal, loneliness and hunger; his life of living death that never ends.
A bulk of the story takes place during the 18th Century. Louis is bitten by a vampire named Lestat (Cruise) who becomes his mentor. Initially Louis' attitude towards vampiric activities is negative; but his life is never the same when Lestat brings young Claudia (Dunst) into the equation.
At the outset I thought this film had massive potential to be the next great vampire movie. The acting can't be faulted and the attention to detail is unbelievably meticulous; featuring some gorgeous production design and authentic costumes. But the film is very hard to get into. We're just thrown into a world without knowing anything about the characters. The opening introduction just wasn't enough character development before launching into the story. And throughout the film the filmmakers failed to frequently remind us that it's just a character telling a story. Very rarely do we cut back to the hotel, and too infrequently do we hear voice-over narration.
After the first 50 minutes the film becomes unnecessarily relentless. Things begin getting dull and bleak. And then the film keeps dragging on; becoming increasingly boring. Maybe people who are besotted with vampires could overlook the shallow screenplay.
Like I stated previously, the performances are almost impossible to fault. Tom Cruise sparked controversy when he was cast in the role of Lestat. It took a little while for vampiric Cruise to sink in. He gives it everything he can, but I don't feel that he was right for the role. In fact I find Cruise completely miscast. He has his moments, though.
Brad Pitt shows great versatility in his performance. When his character is an experienced member of the vampire race he is wooden but chilling. His make-up really assisted in this aspect. Back in the 18th Century he seems very reluctant to carry out the duties of a vampire. He expresses emotion quite well while playing this side of his character.
Kirsten Dunst beguiled audiences with a performance that belies her years. The film needed a young actress who could display a range of emotions for different situations. Dunst nailed the role of tragic young Claudia.
The director failed to an extent because the film couldn't engage me. The acting was great but the images were quite dull throughout the movie. The gore is inexorable when the occasion calls for it. Apart from the gory scenes the film had nothing going for it. The drama seemed shallow and is staged appallingly. Maybe if the dialogue was a bit more fascinating (looking at the screenwriter for this flaw) then the film could have been a lot better.
Interview with the Vampire had potential that was spoilt in its execution. Apart from some creative ideas, intriguing imagery and stellar performances the film has little else to offer. Followed by Queen of the Damned.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Interview with the Vampire
Posted : 16 years, 11 months ago on 7 May 2007 09:27
Overall this is an alright film to watch, but I think that it has some drawbacks which hinder it.
For starters, I don't think Tom Cruise really works well in the part of Lestat, or as a vampire in general. The only time I felt that he actually fit well was at the very end in the car.
Second, the effects just look a bit naff most of the time. I'm all for toning down on the special effects, but at least make it look like you aren't floating on a wire for the sake of elegance!
On a positive side, I think that Kirsten Dunst was fantastic in her role. (Brad Pitt was generally alright too.) As a book-to-film transition I think it was alright, partly because Anne Rice herself worked on the screenplay, nevertheless it does miss out on parts.
I have to stay away from talking about how this film links up with it's sequel, because it really doesn't very well at all. Even though they link through a common series of books (missing one in between), it is probably better to look at them separately. If you're not a reader of Anne Rice then your opinion will probably be different. ;)
For starters, I don't think Tom Cruise really works well in the part of Lestat, or as a vampire in general. The only time I felt that he actually fit well was at the very end in the car.
Second, the effects just look a bit naff most of the time. I'm all for toning down on the special effects, but at least make it look like you aren't floating on a wire for the sake of elegance!
On a positive side, I think that Kirsten Dunst was fantastic in her role. (Brad Pitt was generally alright too.) As a book-to-film transition I think it was alright, partly because Anne Rice herself worked on the screenplay, nevertheless it does miss out on parts.
I have to stay away from talking about how this film links up with it's sequel, because it really doesn't very well at all. Even though they link through a common series of books (missing one in between), it is probably better to look at them separately. If you're not a reader of Anne Rice then your opinion will probably be different. ;)
0 comments, Reply to this entry