Interview With The Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles
The vampire movie subgenre has always been supplemented by that of the vampire novels, going all the way back to Bram Stokerâs seminal work of the story Dracula, which not only invented vampire literature but also laid out much of the hard groundwork for the various pieces of lore and mythology which have permeated the popular culture consciousness of these fictional creatures ever since. Among the more prominent features that Stoker first popularized was the idea that vampires were in essense a kind of earthbound demon whom as long as they followed their own well known ârulesâ, could literally live forever doing what they were doing. And thus the second and more important feature or character trait he wrote of was that vampires made an existence feeding off of and killing mortal humans for their blood and did so in such a way that exercised the absence of any remorse for their misdeeds whatsoever, partly from the acceptance that they are indeed predators who must do what they have to do to survive and also from the idea that spending literal centuries doing such things would seem to imbue in them not only a literal loss of their own humanity but also a seeming contempt for the lower human creatures who know nothing of what they go through but still must be used for the purposes of tracking and killing. Flash forward to 1976 after what must have seemed to be countless variations on the basic themes of Dracula and one witnesses the release of the novel Interview With The Vampire by Anne Rice, another seminal work that used a number of tragedies in Riceâs own life to do something that even Stoker never did: To see life through the eyes of actual vampires, and to be allowed to hear their own inner monologues, philosophies, and ruminations on the joys and tortures of a predatory eternal life. For its time (and long before the romantic gibberish of stories like Twilight) it was considered to be a revelation, resulting in the not so surprising realization by certain fans that being a cursed bloodsucker might actually be something that they WANTED to be. For years the film rights gestated with various production companies, and when finally made in 1994 under the direction of Neil Jordan (still hot off the multi Oscar nominated Crying Game), it featured a plethora of male heartthrob talent that would make any teen girl swoon, including Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, Antonio Banderas, and Christian Slater, all of whom were among the top male sex symbol stars in Hollywood at the time. Of course, the most controversial casting was that of Cruise himself in the role of the beloved master vampire, Lestat, a character whom in the series of novels had assumed guises as both a good guy and a bad guy and of which Rice herself had even said that she had written the role with the intention of having Rutger Hauer playing the part, with other names considered over the years including Jon Voight, John Travolta, Johnny Depp, and even the fan favorite choice of Sting. But most of them were deemed way too old by this time and so Cruise it was, much to the chagrin of Rice (also credited as the movieâs screenwriter) who upon seeing the film later took back her prior statements and had nothing but praise for Cruiseâs performance, as well she should, as Cruise utilized an intensive weight loss regimen, extensive preparation, and truly eerie makeup effects to throw himself completely into the role of an amoral killer who delighted in being as such because it was the only acceptable way of life for his kind. That all being said, it should still be emphasized that the real star of the film is Pitt as Louis, the New Orleans plantation owner who following the deaths of his own wife and child starts to lead a more listless and reckless life with the obvious intention of hoping that someone will put him out of his misery which attracts Cruiseâs Lestat to him like a moth to a flame. The framing device in modern times features Pitt telling his (very long) life story to a writer (Slater, in a role intended for River Phoenix before his OD and the film was later dedicated to him) who would appear to have an odd predilection for picking up strangers in bars and then âinterviewingâ them about their lives for the purposes of his writing down the line. While giving his recollections about his time with Lestat, Louis underlines the philosophical undertones of life as a vampire and how his beliefs and values clashed with those of his maker: Lestat believes that a vampire must simply accept who he is and make the best of it without allowing morals, conscience or even respect for human life to weave their way into his line of thinking, and if telepathic powers (like Lestat apparently has) allows vampires to target and feed on only the most evil and depraved of society, then so be it. Louis on the other hand feels as if the fate that he has agreed to is actually more like an ongoing living hell, with guilt being his main motivator to be able to CHOOSE not to feast on humans and attempt to subsist on animals instead if at all possible. Eventually Louisâ tortured lust for fresh human blood overtakes him and with Lestat he winds up turning a little girl (Kirsten Dunst in an astonishing debut for a child actress) who was about to die from plague anyway and thus have her join their little âfamilyâ. Indeed, the most refreshing thing about the whole story is that there is no human protagonist or âvampire hunterâ type, nor is there really any kind of a âbig showdownâ at the end or any major action scenes, with the various philosophies and exchanges along with the insights that they offer into these creaturesâ mindsets being the real highlight here (as they were in the novel), most notably the fact that vampires have no real sexual tendencies but do seem to be attracted to each other because they ache for companionship down through the centuries with many perceiving of a homoerotic subtext simply because the males of the species seem to want the companionship of other males and so forth. This is most reflected when Louis and Dunstâs Claudia leave America (and Lestat) and travel to Europe to find more of their kind, only to run into a rather large gaggle of them in Paris, a theatrical troupe led by Armand (Banderas) who proclaims himself to be the oldest living vampire along with the performers in his over the top stage show (where vampire kills are presented onstage to paying customers as being âperformance artâ) with the chief one among them being Santiago (Stephen Rea). Turns out that Armand wants Louis all to himself to be his companion, hatching a diabolical plot to get both Claudia and his own âuselessâ minions out of the way because he feels (as Lestat perhaps did) that Louis possessed that certain quality to adapt to changing times and mentalities that would actually make it bearable for living life as a vampire. But the irony becomes that despite the possibly gay themed flavor of these type of proposed long term companionships, Louis discovers that by walking away from Armand and others like him in order to willingly walk alone through the world while still retaining his long held guilts, sorrows, pain and possibly feelings of disgust at the callous methods and thinking of his own kind is what allows him to not only survive, but actually thrive down through the ages all the way to the early 1990s where the story originates with him being interviewed by Slater in that dingy hotel room (with it being especially interesting that he has developed a love of movies through which he can vicariously feel human again and even be able to once again see sunsets). That might actually be the true overriding theme of the story, which is the power of choice and the ability to choose what you want to be in this world despite the pressures of forcibly belonging to a culture which in almost every way completely disgusts and repels you. One might be curious how in some ways a couple of vampires could be able to rack up such a high nightly body count (especially in the early New Orleans scenes) without being detected, but the power of the performances (and dialogue) along with Dunstâs highly underrated turn as a little girl tortured by knowing that she will forever be so continue to make this a fascinating and thought provoking look at the ups and downs of a fictional lifestyle. And the promise of the ending itself (with its tease of becoming a major franchise featuring Cruiseâs Lestat as a hip modern day vampire, as he was in the novels) which was never fully realized as no true sequels were ever really produced (at least not any with Cruise) doesnât really lessen the enjoyment of this being such a scary, yet more cerebral vampire film which wound up winning the full endorsement of the original author herselfâŚ
9/10