Maybe the best film about vampires ever.

Rating: 9/10 (10 August 2000)

As we all know, almost all the movies about vampires are all very similar: A couple of "slayers" trying to kill some bad vampires. This movie is completely different, it's not a film full of gory scenes and lots of fighting between humans and vampires. It's all about a vampire who tells his life story (the whole two hundred years he has been a vampire), and is this fact the one who made me like this movie more than any other vampires movie.
The acting was very good, with a remarkable performance by Kirsten Dunst. It makes me sad to see the lack of recognition that Dunst got. Considering she was only 11 years old when she made this film, her acting is great. Her facial movements are at all time good, and the way she said her dialogs made it look almost real. Tom Cruise got everyone's attention with his performance, even though Brad Pitt did a great job.
The make-up was fantastic (nothing is fantastic actually, but this make-up was close to it). The only think that wasn't very good was Louis' (Pitt) hair in certain scenes, and Armand's (Banderas) hair also, which, in my opinion, looked awful. Lestat's (Cruise) outfit was excellent, and his golden hair looked better than Pitt's.
The color of the eyes that both Cruise and Pitt had made them look more real, and I really enjoyed the fact that the vampires in this movie looked just like normal people, there was no way of noticing any difference, and in this film the vampires kill their victims where nobody can see them. In other films the vampires just arrive to a place where they start killing people for fun and everybody can see that (that is how the "slayers" always get there and end up killing every vampire on the scene).
The film's script was great. The idea of putting some much images from the past, and so little from the present was good.
This film breaks some of the rules in vampire movies. How did Louis killed all the vampires in Paris? Using fire? Who would have thought that was possible. Then Claudia "killed" Lestat by cutting his throat after he drank dead blood? And then Lestat "died" again burned? In old vampire films this methods didn't work.
As Armand said, Louis was a vampire with a human soul. He felt guilty after killing a human, and for a long time he was surviving by eating rats and other animals. But with Lestat's influence Louis became just a bit more aggressive, I mean, he cared less to kill a person. Lestat tried to teach Louis all he knew, I believe, and he wasn't happy after watching Louis refusing to kill humans.
I don't like the fact that Louis ended up not liking Lestat. He had a chance to help him, in 1988, but he did nothing. Well, at least at the end Lestat became the 'old' Lestat again, and he would do to Christian Slater (person who taped Louis' story) the same thing he did to Louis about 200 years earlier.
I rated this movie with a 9 out of 10, it's pretty good, and as I said, a bit different from every vampire movie.