Strangely Compelling But Falters At The End

Rating: 6/10 (11 May 2002)

Brad Pitt is Louis, in this story of Louis' life as a vampire who shares his story in an interview with a newspaper reporter (played by Christian Slater.) The story traces Louis from 1791 New Orleans to the present day. This is not your typical Hollywood vampire movie. It breaks - and even sneers at - many of the Hollywood-created vampire legends, focusing instead on the intricate relationship between Louis, the vampire Lestat (Tom Cruise) and Claudia (Kirsten Dunst), the young girl the pair turn into a vampire and then "adopt."
Frankly speaking, I thought it was Dunst who really made this movie. Her performance as Claudia was magnificent, as she believably captured the pain and confusion of facing possibly eternal life as a child - learning and maturing but never actually growing up. Her performance captivated me. Pitt and Cruise were passable in their roles, but never - in my view - captured the essence of their characters. Antonio Banderas was a disaster as Armand, the Paris vampire that Louis and Claudia eventually discover during their search for their own kind.
This was an interesting enough movie - strangely compelling in fact. I was never tempted to turn away from it. It mixed humour and a mild eroticism into the vampire fare, and did so quite well. The movie fell apart, though, in the last third or so. The relationship between Louis and the Old World vampires just wasn't that intriguing to me. Frankly, the "Vampire Theatre" struck me as simply silly, and Banderas - as I mentioned - just didn't work in the role of Armand. But the first two-thirds were quite good. All things considered, I give this a 6/10.