Interview with the Vampire

[Nikkolas]

What did you think of one of the best vampire books and movies to ever be made?

1. Both the movie and book are excellent. The movie changes some things but not so much as to subtract from the book's atmosphere. The added scene with Louis screaming to the slaves that he is the Devil...awesome.

2. Cruise performed Lestat flawlessly. His best role to date IMO. Pitt carries across Louis' tormented life extremely well also.
Banderas is a little old for Armand but they neeed a suave, seductive man...I guess he fits the role? I'm noe xpert ont hat I'm afriad.

3.Both the boy and the man in the book and movie are idiots. I understand the appeal of a vampire's existence but why would anyone want it after listening to Louis' tale?

 

[Cookie Monster]

Tbh, I didn't like it much. Bram Stoker's Dracula directed by Francis Ford Coppola was much better vampire film, imho. Probably the best I've seen thus far. Plus epic amounts of Gary Oldman and Anthony Hopkins makes that film somewhat godlike.

 

[Shademp]

I have to confess, the book didn't appeal to me that much. Admittedly, I watched the movie before reading the book and that always makes the reading more tedious for me but anyway...
Louis is not nearly as vevacious as Lestat and so things are not kept interesting. I felt like I was moving in a weary twilight zone when Louis went through all those 'woe-is-me-God-does-not-exist' moments.
I couldn't relate to the main issues of the book until I read the sequel, 'The Vampire Lestat'. It did everything so much better than the first. Everything changes when you read the sequel.

The movie works better for me. So many memorable moments. "Oh Louis, Louis... Still HU-WHINING Louis."

 

[Nocturne]

I actually liked Interview with the Vampire alot, mainly because I liked Louis the best out of all of them.

The movie was good too, it followed the book pretty closely.

The Queen of the Damned movie was horrid though, especially compared to the book. Plus the actors sucked in it.

 

[Max Payne]

[quote author=Cookie Monster link=topic=719.msg31694#msg31694 date=1237386566]
Tbh, I didn't like it much. Bram Stoker's Dracula directed by Francis Ford Coppola was much better vampire film, imho. Probably the best I've seen thus far. Plus epic amounts of Gary Oldman and Anthony Hopkins makes that film somewhat godlike.
[/quote]

 

[Dawnbreaker]

[quote author=Dacon link=topic=719.msg32553#msg32553 date=1237618089]
[quote author=Cookie Monster link=topic=719.msg31694#msg31694 date=1237386566]
Tbh, I didn't like it much. Bram Stoker's Dracula directed by Francis Ford Coppola was much better vampire film, imho. Probably the best I've seen thus far. Plus epic amounts of Gary Oldman and Anthony Hopkins makes that film somewhat godlike.
[/quote]
[/quote]

Same. I personally never liked Interview with the Vampire. It was all too grandiose for me. And I'm a huge vampire fan.

 

[Purple]

The movie, I didn't like so much. Something about Tom Cruise really bugs me.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Maybe the fact that he's batshit crazy?

Also, Anne Rice sucks. Though she was much better when she wrote Interview with the Vampire than she is now, but rly, that's not saying much.

 

[Countess Ariadne]

I'm not a huge Anne Rice fan - Especially after she started going psycho after people starting insulting Blood Canticle - But I did like Interview with the Vampire. It's the only movie I've ever liked Tom Cruise in, and I liked Louis as the narrator in the novel. (He's less annoying than Lestat.)

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

What did you think of one of the best vampire books and movies to ever be made?

1. Both the movie and book are excellent. The movie changes some things but not so much as to subtract from the book's atmosphere. The added scene with Louis screaming to the slaves that he is the Devil...awesome.

2. Cruise performed Lestat flawlessly. His best role to date IMO. Pitt carries across Louis' tormented life extremely well also.
Banderas is a little old for Armand but they neeed a suave, seductive man...I guess he fits the role? I'm noe xpert ont hat I'm afriad.

3.Both the boy and the man in the book and movie are idiots. I understand the appeal of a vampire's existence but why would anyone want it after listening to Louis' tale?

Firstly the book isn't the best in Rice's series, the vampire lestat, blackwood farm etc all take precidence over interview with a vampire.
Christ even queen of the damned was a more informative read.

Secondly Cruise was a horrible Lestat, the only thing they got good about him was blonde hair. Pitt did a good Louis mainly because playing a pathetic soul is what comes natural to him.
All in all Stuart townsend managed to make a more believable Lestat dispite the visual differencies and the movie having sweet F-all to do with the book.

Like you said Antonio should not have been anywhere near the film seeing as how Armand is known as the eternal child and is a good villain because of this fact.

 

[Nikkolas]

Firstly the book isn't the best in Rice's series, the vampire lestat, blackwood farm etc all take precidence over interview with a vampire.
Christ even queen of the damned was a more informative read.

Informativeness has nothing to do with quality. in terms of quality Interview was better than QotD.

Secondly Cruise was a horrible Lestat, the only thing they got good about him was blonde hair. Pitt did a good Louis mainly because playing a pathetic soul is what comes natural to him.
All in all Stuart townsend managed to make a more believable Lestat dispite the visual differencies and the movie having sweet F-all to do with the book.

Oh please. Stuart was an insult to the character and that movie was an abomination.
Anyone who reads Interview with a Vampire and no other book in the VC will see quite clearly Cruise did an excellent Lestat. Contrary with how he writes about himself in the sequels, we are seeing him from Louis' viewpoint in the book and film. And in both he is a violent, sadistic asshole. The scene where Cruise Lestat locks the woman in tehe coffin and later screams at Louis that 'YOU ARE A KILLER!" was everything that embodied Lestat in that book.
The only thing missing from that scene was Lestat's vulnerability which we only discover when Louis and Claudia leave him. We see that well enough as well towards the end of the film.

I also find the movie's ending far more satisfactory than the book's. Cruise portrays not only a cruel jackass at the end but also a twisted sense of humor - again capturing the character perfectly.

EDIT: I just realized the person I'm replying too is banned. Oops.

 

[namakemono]

I got to watch Interview with the Vampire at a very young age. And it scared me to death; though it's probably now as scary as I thought it was, up to now, I still can't watch it. It gave me a permanent impression. XD. But nevertheless, I liked it, and though I don't remember much of it, I recall it to be something I had to watch 'til the end.

...hmmm, maybe I should finally watch it again.