LOST BOYS 1987 OR INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE 1994. which film do u like or love the best?

Answer 1

SO, NOW YOU KNOW WHAT WE ARE....NOW YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE.
YOU NEVER GROW OLD MICHAEL....AND YOU'LL NEVER DIE.
BUT YOU MUST FEED. (wipes face and laughs psychoticaly)

Lost boys is ace, the first scary movie I was alowed to watch (i'm 27).
Where have those clasic actors like Corey feldman (goonies also) and Corey haim gone!

Anyway, as the old man says,

One thing about santa carla I never could stomach.
All the damn vampires!

Answer 2

ARGH! I wish people would stop making me have an age crisis by talking about old 80s films like Lost Boys!!

Lost Boys now looks really naff and 80s I'm sorry. It was considered dead scary at the time but its pretty mild and cheesy today. I keep threatening to make my 23 year old boyfriend watch it to give him a taste of the 80s!! (He was only born in 1982 so can't really remember most of them!). I have it on video somewhere.

The Two Coreys! Haim and Feldman!! They are probably about my age now (34!) and languishing in the "where are they now" file. And no I never fancied either of them despite being a teenage girl in their "target" age group . . .

I prefer Interview with the Vampire. I've read a few Anne Rice books and although they can be a bit hard to get through, the film adaptation of Interview with the Vampire was pretty spectacular, very opulent, dark and gothic, great music, much more sophisticated than the Lost Boys. I love the costumes and the historical settings in "Interview". I'm not sure about Tom Cruise as Lestat though, he seems a bit too "camp" for me. I'd have cast different actors in the roles I think.

Antonio Banderas made a wonderful vampire even though the character of Armand is nothing like that in the books (he's described as teenage and angelic looking, not all dark and sexy and gothic and in his 30s!).

Stariko - I have to say that although the Queen of the Damned film was a bit naff I actually preferred Stuart Townsend's Lestat to Tom Cruise's. He was skinnier, sexier and he had the arrogance and the slinkiness of a vampire plus he even bothered to have a go at the French Accent. I could almost forgive his brown hair and lack of golden curls (I've always seen the original Lestat as a kind of Robert Plant circa 1975 - an arrogant, strutting golden haired rock god type!).

Tom Cruise just seemed too foppish but not in the "right" sort of way . . .

Answer 3

Well as The Lost Boys is a children's film I'll have to go for the grown up vampire movie. Mind you, Lost Boys came out in the same year as Near Dark and that vampire classic beats both of them.

Answer 4

Interview With The Vampire..

Answer 5

Definitely Lost Boys.

Answer 6

Well just because they both have vampires doesn't mean they can be compared. I LOVE Interview with a vampire because the concept was amazing and it was designed to be a realistic drama. While Lost boys was just a fun movie to watch. I like them both, but if I had to choose I'd probably go with Interview.

Answer 7

Lost boys is far better although Interview with a Vampire hasn't dated as badly, I think the 80s feel adds to the lost boys charm. Plus Kiefer Sutherland and Jason Patrick were much yummier than Tom and Brad!

Answer 8

I liked Lost Boys the movie better but I loved Interview w/ Vampire book, Ann Rice is awesome!!

Answer 9

Interview w the Vamp is better than Lost Boys, although it was Keither Sultherland starred in Lost Boys but its Brad Pitt n Tom Cruise tat make Interview a success Vamp movie.

Answer 10

the 2 films are very different, i like both but feel interview with a vampire is a better made film however lost boys is classic

Answer 11

I like Interview more. Though, Lost Boys is a classic.