Directed by:
Neil JordanScreenplay:
Anne RiceCinematography:
Philippe RousselotComposer:
Elliot GoldenthalCast:
Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, Kirsten Dunst, Stephen Rea, Antonio Banderas, Christian Slater, Thandiwe Newton, Helen McCrory, Roger Lloyd Pack, Marcel Iures (more)VOD (2)
Plots(1)
The selfishly evil vampire Lestat (Cruise), seduces Louis into a life of immortality, where he is troubled by the need to kill to maintain his own life. He confesses his 200 year erotic and bloody adventure to an unbelieving journalist. (official distributor synopsis)
Videos (1)
Reviews (9)
A remarkable vampire epic, which certainly does not rank amongst vampire horror movies, but rather, with surprising elegance, balances on the edge of drama and a relatively controversial love story. The quintessence of this spectacle is the convincing performances of Cruise and Pitt, whose homosexual relationship is hinted at throughout the film. In the end, in Interview with the Vampire, the relationships between the characters and the kind of "realistic" view of the vampire underworld play a much bigger role than any vampire props. Definitely an interesting film, which is not quite perfect perhaps only due to a lack of significant gradation and a slightly better built story. But these deficiencies are replaced by the atmosphere and some really great and powerful scenes that will stay with you.
()
So far, I haven't given an above-average rating to any of Neil Jordan's films, and this one is no exception, although it's probably the closest. Great actors, dense dark atmosphere, several excellent scenes... And that's where it ends, because the plot seemed rather empty to me most of the time, almost uninteresting and tedious. In the story of a vampire who retained the remnants of his humanity, I did not notice any added value. Sometimes it seemed to me that I was watching more of a parody (for example, sleeping in coffins seemed to me more like What We Do in the Shadows or Dracula: Dead and Loving It), and I was quite annoyed by how the film defined itself against almost everything that belongs to the genre, just to be different and interesting.
()
This is a film that shaped me like no other. It would be futile to count all the reruns I've seen, all the formats in which I've watched Interview with the Vampire, and to calculate how intimately the adaptation rooted my love for Anne Rice within me. Even twenty years later, the film hasn't aged and every little detail is still fascinating. The soundtrack comes from another world, and Lestat and his story never cease to inspire. Kirsten Dunst became a legend and Antonio Banderas has never forgotten his Parisian days at Theatres des Vampires... The new series Interview with the Vampire (2022) is also great.
()
Rather than horror, this film is an unconventional and at times poignant tale of life and suffering in the grip of immortality, fortunately rendered engagingly enough that the viewer has no problem with its two-hour runtime. If anyone is expecting a chilling, uncompromising horror film with lots of scares, they've come to the wrong place. Interview with the Vampire has a very strange and at times gloomy atmosphere, but its main purpose is definitely not to scare you to death. Rather, the director takes a lot of chances with his idea, relying on the emotional expression of each actor, which is without exception amazing, be it the diabolical Tom Cruise, the suffering and sobbing Pitt or the small and incredibly convincing Kirsten Dunst, all of which make this film a classy and exceptional spectacle.
()
A very well-made picture, brought down mainly by the actors. Not that their acting is bad, quite the opposite, most of the performances are above their usual standard, but the casting could certainly have been better. Mainly Lestat (but I have almost nothing against Cruise) completely lacks the aura of charisma that the book gives him. The only one who manages to get under your skin with her acting is “young" Claudia, played by the splendid Kirsten Dunst. The adaptation went well, but all that remains are nice illustrations of the book, because they left out its philosophical level. Absolutely completely. Which, considering the whole story, atmosphere and message is founded on it, is rather a serious shortcoming.
()
Ads