Perhaps the best adaptation ever!!!!

Rating: 8/10 (22 April 2006)

Plot: The plot is based on the novel by Anne Rice (actually the first book in the Vampire Chronicles) and takes a different approach to illustrating Vampires; here we are told the story from a Vampire's point of view (although it's a disgruntled Vampire's point of view). The Vampire Louis is 'made' in 1791 by another Vampire; Lestat; who takes pity (for lack of better word) on the young man who is very disgruntled with his current life, not that the transition into Vampire does anything to that view. This adaptation is one of the best I have had the pleasure to see, it does have its alterations but since Anne Rice herself as had a hand in the adaptation they don't impact the adaptation that much. I can't find anything that I can say destroys my impression of the book, there are of cause minor points but they don't ruin the flow or experience of my mental picture of the scenes (in fact some of them I didn't even realize). Now I have to say that this isn't my favorite book in the series but indeed a great one.
Actors: The actors do a magnificent job at portraying their various characters and are mostly well cast. Tom Cruise does portray Lestat de Lioncourt with just the right amount of darkness and emotional lacking that is conveyed in the novel, but he still does not fit with my picture of Lestat, this however is not any failing of Tom, but rather on the casting (just to clarify, the casters would have been hard set to find anyone else that could have played the role of Lestat this good). Brad Pitt is almost perfectly cast as Louis de Pointe du Lac, he portrays the character with just the right amount of disgruntlement and unhappiness that is central to the character. I find this role more his breakthrough than the one he actually became known from. Antonio Banderas portrays Armand with the right kind of passion and joy at finding this 'new' Vampire to teach and spend time with. You also get the feeling that he's missing something in his unlife (now I won't spoil it if you haven't read the Vampire Chronicles, but that portray is right on Armand). Stephen Rea portrays Santiago just as perfectly as the rest of the actors do theirs. Santiago isn't one of the greatest roles in the novel but still an important one and Stephen nails it. Santiago is himself an actor and playwright and one who follows the rules of the Vampires to the letter, and this is conveyed perfectly by Stephen. Kirsten Dunst is adorably as Claudia, the Child Vampire. She truly acts with a great understanding of the character (remarkably considering her age at the time) and the emotions that anybody would have in a situation such as Claudia's. Christian Slater portrays Daniel Malloy with enough uneasiness that he doesn't fall flat on his face but his is the least of the performances, but given that this is probably the least explained (fleshed out) characters in the novel (he's gets his due later in the series) he does a good enough job.
Effects: Big applause to Stan Winston for the Vampire effects, they're just stunning, as is the burning of New Orleans (which is mostly computer generated since the city of New Orleans wouldn't let the filmmakers use any pyrotechnics, and who can blame them?). The sets and clothing also fits nicely with the Victorian age.
Overall: Well as I said this is one of the best adaptations I have seen (it even takes into account some of the later revelations in the series). I have a hard time finding anything bad to say about it; the only thing I can come up with is that I think that Stuart Townsend (Queen of the Damned) is a better Lestat than Tom Cruise. I give this movie 8 out of 10. The extra material on the DVD doesn't give much but a nice anyway, the commentary by the director is nice enough but I miss someone else that he could discuss the scenes with, the making of is also interesting but these two extras isn't enough to satisfy me.