MovieChat Forums > Interview with the Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles (1994) Discussion > This movie holds up incredibly well

This movie holds up incredibly well

posted 8 years ago by PeteyandJia (300)
6 replies | jump to latest

Saw it in the theater when it came out, in 1994. Just rewatched it again, as I do every few years or so. Got to show it to some people who had never seen it before. I am always pleasantly surprised just how well this film holds up, a true classic. And I always notice a little something new.

A really complete piece of filmmaking -- the direction, the acting, the writing, the set design, the score, everything operating at such a high level and coming together so well. Masterpiece.

[–] DracTarashV2 (4497) 7 years ago

I agree with every word. It's not only terrific for a vampire adaption, but it is an impressive film in general. And it does have a timeless feel to it.

[–] maul (1667) 7 years ago

Yes, best vampire movie so far.

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 7 years ago

Great production values make this age well indeed, yet I always see it as a missed opportunity that Cruise, Pitt and Banderas didn’t return to these roles for a Queen of the Damned sequel and then perhaps another Cruise movie with Body Thief.

They could have easily returned to these roles ten or even fifteen years later as all three actors aged well.

[–] maul (1667) 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 7 years ago

❤️️
I agree 100%! It's timeless. This one and if you go further back to the 80s, Amadeus. That is another one that seems to hold up very well.
This is one of my all time favorite Vampire movies.

[–] bozo_500 (13388) 6 years ago

i remember it coming out late 94/early 95 and seeing the posters for it around and was intrigued by megastar Cruise being in it (hadnt yet seen one of his films at the cinema) and the hip cast and realistic vampires (hadn't seen Coppolas Dracula yet so still thought of them as Hammer horror bright tomato ketchup style) . also remember Empire (which id just started buying about then) gave it 5 stars. so was thinking might go see it (plus it was an 18 and was finally at the age to see adult having seen Pulp Fiction a couple of month before..) didn't get around to it though. maybe the idea of seeing an 18 rated realistic vampire movie on the big screen was abit daunting lol. also think I was gearing up for Star Trek Generations that came out about same time and probably couldn't think of much else lol

anyway it mustve been just a higher quality of filmmaking back then.. not reliant on CG for everything even sets/extras..so it all looks real even now (unlike say Twilights which all look CG). CGI has made filmmakers complacent and overuse and everything looks kind of like an expensive video game even great stuff like Endgame (which will age worse in years to come) . e.g. I bet a Hulk movie made in the mid 90s with state of the art makeup/animatronics/bodybuilders/camera tricks etc would look far more realistic now than all the CGI Hulk of past 15 years

a pity there wasnt a series of Vampire Chronicles movies with the same cast but I guess that wasn't the mentality back then (although there were umpteen Freddy, Jason, Halloween, Batman, Star Trek etc movies)