AboveDeepBuggy Some things I liked some I did not.

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Tweetienator Interview with the Vampire is like Bram Stoker's Dracula one of the few very good to outstanding vampire movies and on top with a good shot of gothic horror atmosphere. No Twilight or Underworld mass pulp here.Excellent movie with a good story, fine acting and sometimes outstanding visuals. A classic and must-have for every serious vampire collection. Thumbs, sorry, teeth up!

merelyaninnuendo Interview With The Vampire : The Vampire Chronicles3 Out Of 5Interview With The Vampire : The Vampire Chronicles is an interesting take on one's usual vampire tale, especially since it focuses less on the characteristics of it and more on the revenge aspect of it. The chemistry among the characters is acted out and written brilliantly especially in its first two acts where diplomacy brews among them which grows into a behemoth rage of vengeance and spirals out its plot with an eccentric push. It is rich on technical aspects like costume design, art design, editing and sound department. The script is not as smart as the makers think but it surely is gripping enough to keep the audience engaged and invested in it. Addition to that, the makers uses their star power wisely and draws in most of the attention from it.Anne Rice; the writer, has done an amazing work on creating a high pitched tensed drama among its three dimensional characters where Neil Jordan; the director, is merely supporting her on its execution where he should have been more expressive and accurate on his vision. The performance is objective is utterly satisfied by the protagonist Brad Pitt and his supporting cast Tom Cruise, Kirsten Dunst and Antonio Banderas. Interview With The Vampire : The Vampire Chronicles is a thought-provoking but an over-stretched interview which may not be as nutrient but is surely juicy.

slightlymad22 Continuing my plan to watch every Tom Cruise movie in order, I come to Interview With The Vampire (1994)Plot In A Paragraph: Louis (Brad Pitt) a vampire tells his epic life story: love, betrayal, loneliness, and hunger.At the time of release, this was not like any other vampire movie I had seen. In movies like Lost Boys and various others, being a vampire is portrayed as almost fun. This movie goes into what a curse immortality is, in a similar way Highlander did, admits all the decapitations. Cruise does not play the main role in this one, but he does something all great actors can do. Play the best part in the movie and steal every scene. The best role in a movie, does not need to be the lead role. It just needs to be the most memorable, and Cruise dominates proceedings and truthfully the movie is duller when he is not on screen. Which sadly is almost all the last half of the movie. Brad Pitt is not an actor I really care for. There are exceptions, but generally he bores me. This is one such example. I must point out Kirsten Dunst,who was rightly nominated for an Oscar. Her performance is superb. If it was not for Cruise she would have stole the movie. Antonio Banderas is OK, whilst Cristian Slater doesn't really have much to do. I never realised Cruises future MI2 co star Thandie Newton was in this. I enjoy the use of Guns N Roses cover of Sympathy For The Devil over the end credits too. I actually let the credits run. I wonder why there was never a sequel, it's certainly open for one, and the potential is there. Maybe it wasn't a big enough hit. Finishing outside the Top 10 highest grossers of the year. As Interview With The Vampire grossed $105 million at the domestic box office, to end the year the 11th highest grossing movie of 1994.

Tweekums 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.