I was pretty disappointed by Neil Jordan's Interview with the Vampire. It might be that I just don't like vampire movies, but I think the bigger reason is that I just don't like bad movies. Apparently the movie's sympathetic vision of vampires was revolutionary ... or something. It didn't seem that novel or interesting to me. It follows the story of Louis (Brad Pitt) over the past 200+ years after being turned by Lestat (Tom Cruise). Kirsten Dunst plays an angsty and needy teenage vampire and Antonio Banderas plays a suave yet flamboyant vampire. All of them are orgiastically homoerotic towards each other.I'm sure there's a lot about vampire culture I don't understand, but the stuff I did understand wasn't very good. The story plodded along, the wooden dialogue stumbled forward, the actors didn't complement each other. The camera focused on meaningless gestures, the editing lacked purpose, and the movie felt like it took three hours. I had to stand up and walk around to stay awake, which annoyed every one else I saw it with. But as soon as I stopped walking around and sat down, I fell right back asleep. The positives: some interesting ideas and cool special effects. I'm sorry to say it, but don't bother with this movie unless your a vampirophile.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110148/