adonis98-743-186503 It hasn't even been a year since a plantation owner named Louis lost his wife in childbirth. Both his wife and the infant died, and now he has lost his will to live. A vampire named Lestat takes a liking to Louis and offers him the chance to become a creature of the night: a vampire Interview with the Vampire benefits from excellent perfomances by Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise and a young Kirsten Dunst but also terrific special effects for the time that the movie was released and it's entertaining enough despite some problems with the looks and story. (7.5/10)

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.

igeorge1982 Many people in my regards are stuck with the direct circumstances, de facto with the vampire world. I think it is like we won't see the wood if we look at one tree, only, and certainly we will miss one of the best presentation of character evolution that Brad Pitt achieves. Both Lestat, played by Tom Cruise, and Luis, played by Brad Pitt, are very complex and subtle characters. The directing is great, and the overall atmosphere is like it pulls you right into the spot as if you would be a third person on the scene. There are no missed cuts that would disturb the mood, that the film intends to create. It's very great movie from every aspect!

Thomas Drufke I'm always down for a horror film that switches up the conventional tropes of the genre. Interview with the Vampire certainly does that, but it also fails to capture one's undivided attention for a full 2 hours.Coming out in 1994, this was the very beginnings of Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt's rise to fame, and that plays into a lot of the fun with the film. Cruise plays a seasoned vampire, Lestat, who seeks out a partner in crime, Brad Pitt, to be the next vampire along his side. Pitt had dealt with plenty of loss in his life and so a step away from his normal life and into the immortal life isn't the worst thing. But Lestat's harsher ways of living prove to be too much for Pitt's 'Louis' character. And there you have much of the first half of the film.It's pretty weird watching these established actors back when they were obviously taking on more risky roles such as these. I can't see either of the two taking on a vampire film now, so I guess that adds to the uniqueness of this film. There's plenty of bloody fun to be had with the film. There aren't a ton of scares, which is disappointing, but there's no shortage of obscure Cruise monologues and slasher twists.With that said, the film takes an unexpected turn about half way through, and the rest of the story falls of the rails because of it. So much so that the first and second hour feel like completely different stories. Mixed in you get a touching arc about Louis taking in a young Kirsten Dunst, who is surprisingly great (at only 12 years of age), but it's not enough to overcome a really weak second half.To me, the film is at its best when it explores the dynamic between Louis and Lestat, and lets Cruise and Pitt go crazy with dialogue and peculiar actions. Once we dive deep into why there are vampires and Antonio Banderas' character, the film falls flat.+Cruise & Pitt playing strange/creepy vampires+Bloody fun first half-Flat second half5.8/10