Interview with the Vampire (1994)

Now the moment you've all been waiting for, the movie that was ingrained in me since childhood, I present to you...Interview with the Vampire.

Published in 1976, Anne Rice's bestselling novel changed the image of the modern-day vampire. When watching the film Dracula's Daughter, Anne Rice envisioned them as sensitive, elegant, tragic creatures who questions the morality and philosophy of life while giving in to their animalistic urges. Interview with the Vampire met with varying degrees of success and a film adaptation was in the works. The project had been in development hell with Anne Rice wanting Rutger Hauer in the role of Lestat. It wasn't until the success of the film version of Bram Stoker's Dracula that moviegoers had a sudden interest in the vampire genre. So on the eve of 1992, Warner Bros. was able to secure the rights after being sold to Lorimar.
Neil Jordan, fresh of the success of The Crying Game (one of my favorite movies), got on board to direct. He was intrigued by the script, proclaiming it to be like no other and slightly theatrical. Neil Jordan agreed to direct on the condition that he gives his own vision to the script and the result...is a masterpiece!
This is by far, the best book-to-screen adaptation we've had in over a decade.
The movie does a good job of capturing the feel of the novel, catching the essence of Anne Rice's world dripping from the screen. It's marvelous.
It's a film that was made at the right moment and at the right time when Hollywood was going for more niche genres. How I like to describe Interview with the Vampire is a historical, gothic, romantic horror drama. And it's done exceptionally well.
The casting is near perfect. I thought all of the performances were great with everyone being in tune with their characters, even if it's from the most unlikely of actors at the time.

Let's start with Brad Pitt as the titular vampire.
In the early days of casting, Anne Rice suggested French actor Alan Delon in the role and fun fact!

To avoid Hollywood's supposed homophobia, Anne Rice decided to genderswap the role of Louis to a woman and she even considered either Angelica Huston or the singer-actress Cher. Cher was a runner-up and was in the midst of working on a song for the movie's soundtrack called Lovers Forever, but wound up being rejected by the producers and some years later would be released on her album Closer to the Truth.
Though as the years progressed and when the film broke out of development hell, Val Kilmer was considered but turned it down. Then came Brad Pitt.

He was and still is, one of Hollywood's bonafide sex symbols. This was at a time where he wanted to break out into more versatile roles, starring in films like Cool World, True Romance, and Kalifornia. Originally, Anne Rice wanted Brad Pitt to swap roles with his co-star Tom Cruise but it was decided he was more fit for the character of Louis. And of course, Brad Pitt does an incredible job.

He internalizes Louis' inner pain and carries his performance with a gentle touch and fiery passion. In the original novel, he is grieving over the death of his brother whereas, in the film, he's grieving over the death of his wife and unborn child through childbirth. I guess this was a way for the filmmakers to give Louis' backstory more of an emotional punch. I think the change works as this will clash into the narrative in the film as Claudia in the guise of his surrogate daughter.

Brad Pitt did a good job of making the character sympathetic. Where there is a coldness in his exterior, there is sorrow and regret in his interior. I couldn't think of any other actor who carried the role like he did.
But for Anne Rice, there were plenty of actors for the role of Lestat.

Anne Rice's first choice was Rutger Hauer, who's known for being in 80's cult classics like Blade Runner, Ladyhawke, Flesh and Blood, and The Hitcher. Alongside him was Richard Gere and John Travolta. I could see Richard Gere playing the role but John Travolta is a little...meh for me, I don't know. However, Rutger Hauer was the more definitive choice. You can just tell he'll pull the role off, having a sort of Shakespearian style to his acting. Though as the years went by into pre-production, Anne Rice thought he was too old at the point. Ironically, Rutger Hauer would later play the lead vampire antagonist in the 1992 film version of Buffy The Vampire Slayer.
But oh no, it doesn't stop there. A slew of actors was considered for the role.

First off, there was Russian ballet dancer Alexander Godunov in the early casting, who looks exactly how Lestat is described, and given that he was a ballet dancer, would perform the more physically challenging stunts. Then there was actor John Malcovich would've also been a good choice which I solely judge on his performance in Dangerous Liaisons, that he would capture Lestat's allure and trickster-like playfulness. Actor Peter Weller was considered who I guess would've been a fine choice, but unfortunately, the only few roles I know of him is as Robocop. Though I have seen his other movies, such as the critically-lauded Naked Lunch, so I think he would've handled Lestat well. Jeremy Irons was approached for the role but didn't want to spend hours behind make-up after he finished filming the 1993 adaptation of House Of Spirits. To me, he would've added a unique flavor with his trained theater background, however, in the same year, he'll have another iconic role as the voice of Scar in Disney's The Lion King.  Academy Award winner Daniel Day-Lewis was considered but dropped out at the last minute.

British actor Julian Sands was a runner-up. Anne Rice, the fans of the novel, and I, myself, agree that he would've nailed it as Lestat. After seeing him in movies like Gothic and Warlock, he definitely has an enchanting presence and charm that would've fit well into Lestat's qualities. Unfortunately, he was not well known in the states.

Enter Tom Crusie. Anne Rice was NOT happy about this. I guess because she thought that Tom Cruise was this generic, all-American, mom and apple pie-kind of actor who would never pull off a role like this.

Come to everybody's surprise, he actually did an incredible job. Dare I say it, but I think this is one of Tom Cruise's best performances.

He is exhilarating as Lestat, capturing his boyish playfulness and seductive charm. He plays his role with such ease and gracefulness, even Anne Rice was singing his praises. I'm surprised he wasn't nominated for a Golden Globe. Yes, he was that good. Hopefully, when there is a television miniseries in the works (*wink* *wink*) if there is an actor in mind of Lestat, let's see if he could blow it off-the-park like Tom Cruise did.

To my knowledge, Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise won for Worst Screen Combo at the Razzies, though I never really had a problem with the chemistry. I thought they played off each other well. Sure, it's hard to notice the romantic aspect of their chemistry, though, other than that, I didn't think their collaboration was so bad they had to win a Razzie for it.

Speaking of awards, we have Golden Globe supporting actress nominee, Kirsten Dunst as Claudia. Just like Lestat, the role of Claudia was a very important one. A number of young actresses were on the casting call.

First, there was Christina Ricci who was the most sought-after child actresses at the time. Her range is masterful and I think she would've done a great job.

Then there was Dominique Swan, another child actress with a sharp talent and had an ethereal presence that compliments Claudia's description.

Julia Stiles was also a great choice because of her passionate emotional range.

Natalie Portman was considered. Judging by her intense performance in Leon, The Professional, She was a good fit for the role.

Lastly, we have Evan Rachel Wood who was a runner-up. I definitely would've seen her as Claudia. She would've totally killed it. Though ironically, she would play the vampire queen Sophie in the supernatural drama True Blood.

Finally, Kirsten Dunst was the first to be chosen and as much as I like the aforementioned actresses, her performance blew me away. This role was made for her.

To be an actress of her age to stand between Hollywood heavyweights such as Brad Pitt and Tom Crusie, that is truly inspiring. Which is why she was nominated at the Golden Globes and deservedly so.

Not only Anne Rice made the character of Claudia iconic, it was also Kirsten Dunst who brought her to life on screen.

Here, we have Antonio Banderas as Armand. Now here's where the casting of Armand gets tricky. In the original novel, Armand is a teenage boy around the age of 17 with curly red hair. But the filmmakers decided to cast the much older Antonio Banderas in the role. Fun Fact! Antonio actually auditioned for the part of Dracula in Bram Stoker's Dracula, two years prior before Gary Oldman helmed the role.

Although it would be nice to see an actor fit Armand's description, Antonio Banderas did a good job. He does have an alluring presence about him that make the character work and even if he doesn't fit the actual description of Armand, he does capture Armand's powerful essence.

The role of the interviewer, Daniel Molloy, was originally going to be cast with River Phoenix in mind, but his death in 1993 prevented that. Just imagine having Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise, and River Phoenix in the same film. That would've been golden. And I feel that an actor of his stature would fit well with Anne Rice's vision. But as the casting went with Stephen Dorff in mind who would later ironically play the vampire antagonist in the 1998 film Blade, The filmmakers went with Christian Slater instead.

Christian Slater did a serviceable enough job, though, in the sense, Daniel is more of a reactionary character but with a little bit of build up that would add later into what was going to be an official sequel to this movie, which I will discuss later.

Now I would love to talk about the makeup and special effects done by the one and only Stan Winston. He is a master of his craft putting in an amazing amount of virility in his work.

I get a sort of Hammer Horror feel when it comes to the production and scope of the movie yet with a slight touch of the modern nineties aesthetic. Ah, the simple days of practical effects.

The makeup effects are beautifully designed and detailed. To make this effect convincing, the actors had to hang upside down in order for the makeup artist to trace out the blood veins to enhance that otherworldly vampire look. But every so often they had to do this every 30 minutes. Upon learning about this, I totally understand why Brad Pitt had such a terrible time working on the film.
Now, this leads me to one of the most climactic scenes of the movie...Louis' revenge. This is one of the tragic parts of Interview because it shows that Louis is all alone in his detriment, seeking the humanity he once lost. 
In the original novel, the events of this scene plays out differently. I must warn you, I have a habit of spoiling things when it's important to my reviews, so if you haven't read the novel or seen the movie, just go back in a couple of days or so if you can, but, other than that, here I go.

*spoilers*

It turns out that Armand's coven of theater vampires are a bunch of vigilantes who believe that if a vampire is revealed to be an outlaw, they must be punished. Once they come to the notion that Claudia has killed a vampire, they take this opportunity to take Louis as a prisoner and execute Claudia and her new sire, Madeline, by sunlight. In the novel, it turns out that a disoriented Lestat has survived his ordeal, following Louis and Claudia as he seeks revenge. Armand manipulates him by setting up a mock trial to punish Claudia for attempting to kill him, though, in the film, there is a deleted scene where Louis encounters Lestat through the tunnels of Paris. But it turns out that Armand betrays Lestat and throws him off of a balcony, all so he can have Louis for himself.

After Louis takes his revenge on Santiago and the vampire actors, he and Armand become companions for decades, though, there is a bit of resentment on Louis' behalf. But in the film, Louis upright refuses to be Armand's companion, knowing that Armand could've saved Claudia if he wanted to. So, Louis sets off and continues his journey alone.

By the end of the interview, Daniel suddenly has the desire of becoming a vampire much to Louis' disdain.

When Louis furiously rejects his offer of siring him, Daniel frantically drives in his car and listens to the recorded tapes, when all of a sudden, Lestat appears behind him and bites his neck. Lestat takes hold of the vehicle and promises a bewildered Daniel of a prosperous new life...

*spoilers end*

I give all my praises to Neil Jordan for putting in his passion into this project. His direction is outstanding and there's not a flaw in his game. The costume design, the production design, the writing, the characters. Neil Jordan and Anne Rice put in thought, frame, and consideration into the making of this movie.
The ending is left open for a sequel that sadly never came to fruition. We continue on with Lestat as the main character in Queen Of The Damned but we never actually continue on with Louis nor Daniel, which is really disappointing. I'm gonna do some deep digging when it comes to Queen Of The Damned because that movie was a HUGE missed opportunity. That's a story for another day.
However, this film was perfect all around. It's a vampire movie at it's finest and it's right up there with Bram Stoker's Dracula. I think I run out of great things to say about this movie. It's none-the-less an artistic achievement in 90's cinema.
My Last Word: an all-out classic!

THE KARDASHIANS/JENNERS HISTORY OF RIPPING OFF BLACK WOMEN & THEIR NEGAT...

The Truth Will Be Revealed...

Vampire's Kiss (1989)

Hey guys! Long time, no see. During this quarantine, I've been spending my weeks finishing up my novel and now that is finished, I'm back in the game! In preparation for the upcoming Vampire Chronicles review, I thought I take a look into the Nicolas Cage oddity that is Vampire's Kiss.
This may sound weird but I first watched this movie when I was a mere ten years old, something I wasn't supposed to be watching at that age, but don't worry, it was on the USA channel late one night. I...just didn't know what to think of this movie. It was one of those movies I can't quite put my finger on.
So I looked at this movie again for over a couple years and to my surprise, I found out that this was actually marketed as a comedy. Sure, Nicolas Cage is over-the-top and zany in this, but this movie is far from a comedy. It's, to be fair, quite disturbing.
It's more in the guise of a psychological thriller where you don't know what's real or not and towards the end, it turns into full-on horror. I could easily compare it to George A. Romero's Martin, as the horror in the movie is less mystical and more realistic.
Now this is going to be a long review and there's also going to be a bit of psychoanalysis of the 80s yuppie culture. So, brace yourselves, this is going to be a bumpy ride.

The Story: Peter Loew is a stereotypical arrogant yuppie who works in a literary agency in New York City. He usually spends his time club-hopping, picking up women, so on and so forth until he meets a woman that takes his life a turn for the worse.
Okay, I'm going to dedicate all my time to the examination of Nicolas Cage's performance and the character of Peter.

Right of the bat, he is already seeing a therapist and might have been seeing her for a while I presume. He usually boasts about his sexual conquests, his issues at work, yadda, yadda, yadda. Until he talks about one incident where he and his date Jackie encounter a vampire bat which oddly sexually arouses him.

As he continues to date Jackie, Peter suddenly becomes detached, standing her up at an art museum. This moment shows that he is completely unable to have a genuine relationship with a woman and might have slight misogynistic views of them.

This is when he runs into Rachel, a mysterious woman he meets at the bar.

During a sexual tryst, Rachel reveals himself to be a vampire and bites him on the neck. This is where Peter's mental state begins to deteriorate.

Now let's get into the subject of Rachel. This movie is clearly set in a world where vampires don't exist but Rachel is, in fact, a "vampire." An energy vampire. Yes, it is indicated at the start of the movie Peter is mentally ill but he doesn't start losing his rocker until he meets Rachel.

Patricia Arquette was originally set to play the role of Rachel but due to possible scheduling conflicts she wasn't available, so Jennifer Beals was cast. Although I do see Patricia Arquette in a role like this, Jennifer Beals does have an alluring presence about her that makes the role work. Nicolas Cage and Jennifer Beals reportedly didn't get along on set but I feel like the tension between them is what makes their chemistry palpable, considering that Beals is playing a vampiress that is literally sucking the life out of him.

Although Peter tries to make it up to Jackie, Rachel seems to get a hold on him. She may not be there physically but she is there mentally. Therefore, Peter is around her every whim.

It puzzles me that this movie is labeled a comedy. Sure, I did laugh at Nicolas Cage's overly hammy acting, whether intentional or not, but the treatment of Alva, I do not find funny at all. It was really hard to watch. Seeing this poor woman abused at the hand of her boss. It's extremely touchy and relatable to me because anybody in that situation would quit and report Peter's ass. Unfortunately for Alva, she has an overbearing mom who insists she must work to get ahead of her working-class situation. So, Alva has put up with Peter's bullshit throughout the duration of the movie.

On top of that, nobody seems to come to her aid. For instance, there's a scene where Peter is laughing and joking with his colleagues about him basically terrorizing Alva because of a missing file from 25 years ago. This guy actually chases her down all the way to the ladies' room with everyone in sight yet no one helps her and even his co-workers don't see it as a big deal. It showcases the toxic masculinity that these men have and how they treat their secretaries. Of course, this was the 80s which was way before MeToo.

It seems that Peter gets off on torturing Alva in amidst to his attraction to her. Her meekness is what excites his dominance, and therefore, he takes things too far.
Maria Conchita Alonso is mostly known for starring in action movies such as The Running Man and Predator 2. Here, she plays a put-upon secretary, which is far from her tough action roles. She is heartbreaking as Alva and is one of the few sympathetic characters in the film. By the climax, Peter does the unthinkable to her...

Lastly, we have Peter's therapist, Dr. Glaser, played by veteran actress Elizabeth Ashely, who's in a way, takes the role of Peter's conscience. She comes off like a mother figure, something that probably disturbs her. As a patient, Peter is a handful and is easily the most emotionally unstable. It's even to the point where Peter wakes her up in the middle of the night, (while having a rendezvous with her boy toy, no less) clearly showing that she's not always there to fix things for him until it's too late.

And now, we finally get to discuss Nicolas Cage's performance. It is out of this world. Though, there were many other actors considered for this role. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone, of all people, were considered. While Arnold and Sylvester can be good with what they're given, this would have not been it. There is also Actor Judd Nelson, who I can definitely see playing a character like this. Just like Nicolas Cage, he is a very method actor and would've pulled this role off splendidly.

But nothing tops above Nicolas Cage. He puts in his ALL. He even eats a live cockroach just to prove how much of a committed actor he is. His agent was hesitant about him taking on a project like this because, by that time his career was on a high, starring in critically-acclaimed films like Raising Arizona and the oscar-nominated Moonstruck, though, Nicolas Cage thought this project "spoke" to him more. How I describe his performance in the movie is a cross between an unhinged James Cagney and an outlandish Peter Lorre. Let me demonstrate by showing this: And Scene.
See what I mean? This is the Nicolas Cage we've come to know. And it's one of those moments in film where everybody else acts completely normal while the one main character is the one who's cartoonish and wacky.

I find his performance to be both hilarious and terrifying. Yes, I said terrifying. There is a point in the movie where Peter becomes less of an over-the-top goofball and way more threatening.

First and foremost, he definitely crosses the line when he sexually assaults Alva, his long-suffering secretary. Poor, poor Alva.

Then he really goes off his rocker and actually kills a woman at a club with a neck bite. When I first saw this, it caught me by surprise. This legitimately scared me and I was totally creeped out by Nicolas Cage for the rest of the movie.

This is when Peter starts to look more like a deranged Reinfeld than a suave, seductive vampire. Metaphorically, he is a man that literally turns into a monster. But the deep end of this character is his hostility towards women and that he can't seem to find the right one. Just pay attention to how all the women of his life tend to look-alike, which could be judged on possibly either having a distant mother figure or a woman he madly fell in love with that somehow broke his heart. Peter believes that if he finds true love, he'll be cured of his vampire curse. Even when he's talking to his therapist to where she sets him up with a potential love interest, ultimately, he doesn't get along with her from the start.

This all plays out in his disillusioned mind, however, and it gets to the point where he loses his grip on reality.

Through his fragile state of mind, Peter carries a huge wooden stake, and just when Alva's brother comes to defend her, Peter gives him the opportunity to impale him through the heart, instantly killing him.
This movie was...interesting. It was unlike anything I've ever seen as a kid and since then I've been checking out some weird arthouse films that are similar in tone. The movie has a very David Lynchian vibe to it. Ironically, a year later, Nicolas Cage would actually star in the David Lynch film, Wild at Heart. After that, Nicolas Cage continues to take more risks as an actor, which he associates with his unique acting style.
So, is it for everybody? I don't know but I still think it's an interesting psychological thriller that was pretty underrated for its time.
My Last Word: It's up to you. It's one of those movies where you have to wrap your head around though it's a definite must-watch.

Martin (1977)

I'll explain my absence later in the next review but I was inspired to write about this one particular movie. In preparation for the upcoming Vampire Chronicles review, I would like to discuss the underrated George A. Romero film, Martin.
Just like the undertones of Anne Rice's Vampire novels, it delves into the nihilistic and almost human side of the vampire lore. However, in the film Martin, it takes a more realistic approach. Yeah, it's one of those movies. It's much more on the psychological side of things where you question if the events of the film are real or not, but it's all left up to interpretation.

The story is about Martin, a socially awkward teen who happens to be a homicidal serial killer targeting women for their blood. He comes to live with his paranoid cousin Tateh Cuda, who believes him to be this ancient vampire and is intent on destroying him.

Cuda seems to have an old school approach to religion and it's indicated, he too, might have a mental illness.

His exasperated granddaughter Christine (played by George A. Romero's Wife) tries to debunk his claims but Cuda is very stubborn in his beliefs.

In a pivotal scene, George A. Romero makes a cameo as a priest. He comes off this laid-back, chill type of guy and even laughs at Cuda's zealous delusions. Even though he is told that exorcisms are unorthodox, Cuda still attempts to exorcise Martin but to no avail.

Meanwhile, it shows that Martin has a difficult time coping with his depression, which drives him to hunt for blood. He often daydreams in a black and white romanticized world and is clearly losing his grip on reality. As a way to escape boredom, he makes frequent phone calls to a radio talk show where refers to himself as the "the count."

During his run as a grocery delivery boy, he spots a woman at the store and decides to follow her all the way home. He even pretends to be a deaf, homeless boy in order to scope out her house. He now knows the woman has a husband who is planning to go on a business trip. But the real kicker is once he breaks inside, he catches the woman in bed with another man! This sort of screws up Martin's plan, which becomes one of the most suspenseful scenes in the movie. It was intense! But Martin somehow is able to sedate the man, rending him unconscious and easily kills him. After that, he goes back to where he started and goes after the woman, leaving her in a dazed state.

Martin soon begins an affair with a dissatisfied housewife Abbie. I found their relationship rather touching if not sad. It's sort of like they're the same people from different worlds to which it's impossible for Martin to have any true bond with anyone. It's one of the most interesting parts of the movie that ends in tragedy.
Now that he's in a relationship with Abbie, Martin begins to lose the urge to target other women and doesn't crave as much blood.

This all happens when Christine is at her breaking point, fed up with her grandfather's meddling in her life, prompting to leave off with her emotionally available boyfriend played by a young Tom Savini.
So this leaves Martin alone with Cuda, who suspicions of him grow stronger.
Martin decides to get one last hit of blood where he targets two homeless men but after the deed is done, he's caught in the crossfire in between a police stakeout where he miraculously escapes. Unfortunately, once he arrives at Abbie's house, she is found dead in a bathtub, having committed suicide.
Martin begins to reflect, making one last phone call to the radio talk show.

As he is sound asleep, Martin is suddenly awakened by Cuda, who blames him for Abbie's death, eventually staking him in the heart in a gory fashion. And...that's how the movie ends. Just like that.
The film has an overall gritty feel to it. It's not glamorous nor sexy.

The film's setting is mainly working-middle class where it showcases Martin walking aimlessly and listlessly around the desolate streets of Pittsburgh, encapsulating the film's depressing nature.

What's interesting is that the film came around the time when Interview with the Vampire was first published, oddly sharing the same similarities to the 1994 film such as when Martin discusses his daily life to the radio DJ. Martin's backstory is vague though the mystery surrounding him is what makes the film work.

Even though it is set in the real world, the film still has that gothic horror sense to it. Especially in the black and white daydreams of Maritn, where it's played out like a typical old school horror movie. 

The gore effects by master effects artist Tom Savini looks unbelievably gory for its time. Especially when it shows Martin slitting the arms of his victims. It looks painful to watch.

And One last thing, I thought the acting was incredibly good for a low budget movie. It all felt...natural, as if they are real people, going through real issues where none of it feels far-fetched. 

When I first watched this, I thought I was in for an exploitative, grindhouse sort of movie but... I was pleasantly surprised.

It's a deep, poetic film that makes you think about the complexities of human beings where you can separate the soul of the monster with a very haunting music score that sets the mood for what the film unfolds.

It's a tragic story about a young man struggling to cope with the world around him, going into a path of mayhem to quench his thirst which ultimately leads him to his end. 

It shows that George A. Romero can do more than just zombie films. He can write and direct stories that bring on a fresh take of the modern-day monster.

My Last Word: A Must See.