User reviews

I just watched this film again for the first time in maybe 15 or 20 years and I did forget how slow moving this film is. I don't mind a film taking its time to tell a story but there are so many scenes where nothing happens and the characters are just staring at one another. Lots of style and beautiful cinematography and great sets really set the gothic mood in a contemporary setting. But while all this looks great there really is not much in the way of characterization. Film could have benefited from that. The make-up is terrific as we watch David Bowie age in a short time. For you trivia buffs they're are some recognizable actors in small roles like Willem Dafoe, John Pankow, Ann Magnuson and Jane Leeves. Not a bad film. Well made technically and some effective music but little characterization. A real curio.

The film talks about Catherine Deneuve ,she's a seductive vampire living along centuries with David Bowie.They need fresh blood for the eternal life .But Bowie is about to disintegrate and is substituted by a new lover,an enticing scientific-medic ,Susan Sarandon.

The picture is a bizarre bloodsuckers film and for somebody considered with a cult movie's status.It displays luxurious scenarios,arty photography although mostly developed on interior studios.The French actress Catherine Deneuve,as always, is cold and elegant.David Bowie as young and older vampire in an exciting transformation is well.Susan Sarandon as an obstinate scientist is good.Features known secondary actors, Dan Hedaya as a Police Inspector and Cliff DeYoung as Sarandon's lover. Besides future famous actors in small roles, almost extras, as Willem Dafoe,Anne Magnuson,John Pankow and English actors as Sophie Ward and Philip Sayer.The creepy sequences by stop motion referred to an aging monkey are made by Dave Allen.Splendid cinematography reflecting luxuriously sets and scenarios by Stephen Goldblatt.Stylish,elegant costumes by the expert Milena Canonero and wardrobe department and gowns of Catherine Deneuve by the famous French fashion designer Ives Saint-Laurent. The movie is classified by the MPAA with the rating R for blood,violence,gore and kinky nudism.The motion picture is well realized by Tony Scott though a little slow-moving and quite boring.He's nowadays much success and getting high box-office with hits like : ¨Crimson tide, Enemy of state,Spy game,Man of fire and Deja Vu¨ and founded along with his brother Ridley, ¨Scott-Free Production¨.

"The Hunger" opens with the by now familiar Goth anthem "Bela Lugosi's Dead" by Bauhaus. Not a bad way to open a vampire film, though nowadays it would seem almost a parody. "Undead undead undead" indeed. Enter Cathy and Bowie into a slick, sleek, neon nightclub, filled to the rafters with post-punks & pre-Goths playing dead. Too bad they weren't as ready for the real thing as they thought they were. You see, Cathy and Bowie are vampires.

This is a visually stunning film, making up for in effects what it sometimes lacks in coherence. It seems that lovely, immortal Cathy, called Miriam, is a vampire queen who has been around since the Sphinx was built, apparently. Bowie is her consort, a once mortal man whose two hundred-odd year lifespan is suddenly winding down at a frighteningly rapid rate. Desperate to find a cure, he seeks out scientist Susan Sarandon, who at first disbelieves Bowie's claims, but is soon convinced when the young and handsomely androgynous man suddenly ages over the course of a few hours time into a decrepit ruin. Miriam, who has had countless lovers over the centuries, gives Bowie the heave-ho and turns her attention to lovely young Sarandon. But Sarandon, though initially easy to seduce (in an erotic lesbian scene) proves to have a will stronger than Miriam's, and Miriam's habit of keeping her collection of ex-lovers cadavers close at hand, proves to be a mistake.

This is a strange film, almost as cold and dispassionate as one might well imagine a vampire to be. It seems to hold the viewer at arms length, not allowing them to experience the emotions of the characters...but the characters, for the most part, are severely lacking in emotion anyway, so the stark emptiness of the film becomes a brilliant mirror. Some vampire enthusiasts might find this boring and confusing, but it's a good effort and not a total loss.

The three main characters are worth watching simply for their amazing beauty and grace. Tony Scott (brother of Ridley) has made a nice, if somewhat bizarre and chilling, work of art here and, like most works of art, it's up for interpretation.

I watched the Hunger in my teens as a young punk in the 80's. Honestly, back then the fact that Bowie, Peter Murphy and vampire lesbianism was in it made it a 'cool' movie.. flash forward to me now and it's nostalgic 80's with lots of bad makeup and a sub par plot. The lighting effects in the movie annoy me as they use a lot of shadows and dim lighting with blurred backgrounds and points of bright lights. I feel like I need to squint while watching it. Anyway the acting is good and the story is good (never read the book). Do you want to live forever? Do you like vampires, do you like over the top 1980's style ? If so then it's worth the watch.

Before embarking onto this one, you must decide whether or not you enjoy films which look like a very extended (and quite expensive) MTV video clip of the early to mid 80's. If you don't, don't bother with this, it'll probably annoy you greatly. If you do, you're in for an indulgent visual ride and great entertainment, because every frame in Tony Scott's cult classic is carefully planned, beautifully orchestrated and wonderfully filmed - from the iconic opening sequence through to the heavily filtered last shot, it's polished until it gleams. Production design is given full reign and is faultless - the sets, lighting and costumes work fabulously with the soundtrack and the editing, creating a very recognisable style which is a genuine product of the trend aesthetics of the decade in question. And there's an added bonus of knowing use of music - this being the film that "relaunched" the Delibes' Lakme aria, paving the way for it becoming a monster classipop hit it is today. The film also employs Ravel at his most frozenly emotional,and, to stunning effect, Deneuve at arguably her most frozenly beautiful. One of those films remembered for perfectly encapsulating the visual style of its times.

This one started off good, but as soon as David Bowie exits the movie, it really goes downhill as the next part of the movie seems rather rushed and underdeveloped. The story is about a vampire lady and her various loves. I guess that is what it is about because the movie as a whole doesn't really explain things very well. Stuff happens and you are left wondering just what happened. I think though that has more to do with the fact I watched the movie on regular television so it was a bit cut up to shreds. The movie starts with a rather somber and sad little tale with the vampire girl and her lover played very well by Bowie luring a couple to their home. They don't kill how regular vampires kill. As the story moves forward, Bowie's character seems to be aging rather rapidly...his time is apparently nearly up. Unfortunately, he is not allowed to die, but rather face an eternity of rotting in the vampire gal's collection of lovers. Though she does seemingly care for each and every one of them. Then the story races to the finish as the vampire girl really moves fast to fill the void...to fast as this is where the story feels really rushed. At one point Susan Surandon's character does something with a cross either stabbing herself or the vampire...I couldn't tell. Then the movie franticly races to a bizarre zombie like scene and then the end which sort of makes sense. If only it could have ended after Bowie left the picture.

Miriam Blaylock (Catherine Deneuve) is an immortal vampire, who promises certain humans they will embrace eternal life if they become her lover. We see her current lover is John (David Bowie), a young and attractive cellist. The two comfortably live within their own means, sucking blood from unsuspecting people at the nightclubs they frequently venture and assimilate to New York life quite nicely. Feeding on young souls is what keeps Miriam and John eternally young and attractive, and presumably have an incorruptible youthfulness in terms of appearance and state-of-mind.

It isn't until John begins to suffer from chronic insomnia that robs him of his youthful looks and makes him show his age, roughly over two-hundred-years-old, meaning that while he has inherited eternal life, he will never inherit eternal youth. John seeks the help and companionship of Dr. Sarah Roberts (Susan Sarandon), a veteran gerontologist (age specialist) who has researched the aging effects in primates for many years. As John tries to decide whether to fight or come to terms with his aging, which has rendered him lethargic and hideous, Sarah tries to find comfort and answers with her sexuality and her own mortality. Her boyfriend Tom (Cliff De Young) notices her spending more time with Miriam, leading him to question her intentions as she becomes dangerously drawn to the lifestyle Miriam lives by.

Tony Scott's directorial debut The Hunger is one of the damnedest films I've seen in quite sometime, and certainly one of the more interesting vampire films, and directorial debuts for that matter, I've seen, as well. It's a combination of an exercise in modern Gothic style and the elaboration on vampire life in a way that's serious and believable. The Hunger plays like a devilishly sleek and visual soap opera that never so much as scares, but entrances, as it moves with the grace and elegance of a femme fatale, but hulks and lingers like Nosferatu in terms of the presence it reveals.

Simply put, this is an experience more-so than it is a film to find yourself attached to. I found myself rather alienated by the characters in the film, and more concerned with Scott's approach to style and filmmaking craft. The dichotomy of filmmaking brothers Ridley and Tony Scott always fascinates me because where Ridley lacks in craft and detail, Tony always seems to excel, even in his later action pictures like Unstoppable, which have now become grounds for "vulgar auteurism." Tony gets the details of The Hunger down to a tee, be them in an aesthetic perspective that allows the bright color of red to pulsate through the screen at various points in the film, or in a narrative perspective, which has Sarandon's Sarah the main subject of serious commentary on sexual awakening, particularly lesbianism and whether or not her story is a parable of coming to terms with one's own sexuality.

The Hunger is less a film defined by the strength of its acting, but by the sheer presences and personalities its performers exist as, particularly Catherine Deneuve, who radiates enigma throughout the entire film. A beautiful soul in the film, yet undeniably troubled and weighed down by circumstance, Deneuve's Miriam manages to be one of the film's most fascinating characters, despite most of the crucial events of the film happening to David Bowie's John, largely because of her ominous presence throughout the course of the film.

The Hunger's most prominent shortcoming comes in the regard of its editing, which juxtaposes the story of Dr. Roberts with Miriam and John's, causing a rather tumultuous and unpolished editing scheme that has Scott at a quandary in terms of maintaining narrative cohesion. Because of this, Scott can't focus on one particular character or situation and fully develop them, and instead, tries to balance out the playing field by throwing in another story when, in reality, bot need separate developments. It's a classic device many use on their directorial debut to try and prevent monotony and give the audiences a lot to digest, though it backfires here largely because of its strange and carefully plotted story.

With that, the aura of The Hunger and the cast itself, are worth the price of admission. This is a vampire film as original and immersive as it is perplexing, and the style of the film mimics that of Gothic/Victorian-era decor without being too overbearing or reliant on setpieces. Scott and company have, in turn, crafted a vampire film not guaranteed to live forever, but one that will not die quickly thanks to all it lays out on the table.

Starring: Catherine Deneuve, David Bowie, Susan Sarandon, and Cliff De Young. Directed by: Tony Scott.

"The Hunger"(1983)by Tony Scott is a stylish vampire flick filled with some wonderful visuals.The film is excellently acted-a stunningly beautiful Catherine Deneuve is truly memorable as Miriam-an ageless vampire and former Egyptian queen.There is plenty of blood and vampire lesbian sex,so everyone who is into horror films or Goth music should see this cult flick.The opening scene with Bauhaus playing "Bela Lugosi is Dead" is priceless!

A film with lots of style, beautifully shot, almost like a dream. This must be Tony Scott's best film to date, why do you ask? The director shows vision, not only in its visual medium but the editing, the music, the production design, the classical costumes and the chance to work with some talent.

David Bowie is very good, almost perfect for his part and Catherine steals the whole film. Susan Sarandon is also very good, the infamous Lesbian scenes are highly erotic and also very artistic.

This film isn't your usual Vamp movie, the film adds depth to these so-called Vampires.

The film probably required a bit more plot but nevertheless, this is all about style, this film looks fantastic.

Do not watch this in pan and scan, make sure you see it in widescreen because the director and cinematographer make full use of the panavision width.

A pair of vampire lovers drift apart as one of them begins to age at a rapid rate and the other goes looking for another lover to turn and share an eternal life with.

Visually stunning and featuring great turns from Bowie, Deneuve, and Sarandon, The Hunger might not always spell things out plot-wise, but it pulls you in with the strange makeup effects, splashes of gore, and brooding sexuality. It's easily both one of the saddest and most sexually charged vampire films I've seen.

Perhaps the first movie to explore the join and pain of being a vampire and, most importantly, what it means to be immortal. Excellent soundtrack, photography and cast. Not the usual vampire film, it's beautiful and philosophical. I'd say it is even better than "Interview with the vampire" (also a great film).

This film is stunning in it's makeup (especially watching David Bowie age!) and costumes, as well as the sound and visual aspects, like the baboons during the opening attack, but it really shines as a skintastic experience.

The beauties peeling for the camera are Catherine Deneuve, who made being a victim seem sweet; Ann Magnuson, a goth chick fondled and bit by David Bowie; and Susan Sarandon, who already had an Oscar nomination for Atlantic City.

The ending caught me off guard, but after reflection, it made sense and was tragic.

Deneuve and Sarandon will ever be etched in my mind together.

Some advice for those who are planning to watch this film: First of all, this is definitely not your regular cup of tea. I don't love this film and I haven't seen many who do. My advice is, don't go and set aside the time for this piece. It's rather interesting to watch once, but if you have better things to do, do them!

The movie uses a lot of visual effects and sounds to create a spooky, vampiry atmosphere. While the blue theme and the whole dark setting works quite well and the outcome is quite impressive, some people would say that the method is too slow or frustrating. Just keep in mind that this is a visual film. Don't expect too much dialogue, but remember to listen carefully to the things that are said, especially to Miriam (Deneuve). Otherwise you might miss some points and end up in a confused state.

As for the acting, David Bowie is remarkable in his little part, Catherine Deneuve is all class and beauty, and Susan Sarandon has some good scenes. If you're seeking to watch this movie solely because you want to see one of these actors (like I did), you probably won't regret it. But what will get your attention is all the fantasy about how the vampire life works in this story. There are some illogical and not too well thought out theories playing at hand, but when you're watching any fantasy movie, you have to let your imagination take over.

Personally, I think this movie is more fantasy and drama than horror or romance. The whole vampire idea will get your attention because of its relatively novel qualities, but the story is also about a vampiress and her tragic love affairs. I suppose the movie doesn't explore too much into this area. It would've been better if they had. For those who're interested, I recommend the book by Whitley Strieber, which does a better job of explaining things.

This movie suffers from trying to cram too much into one movie. Plot points are introduced and then forgotten (most notably, the monkeys that went haywire, what was the point of that?) and the film's ending is completely baffling. I guess director Tony Scott was more interested in style over substance. Many shots of curtains billowing in the wind, birds flying around and reflections, clutter up the film. My main complaint is the too short scene on Bauhaus performing "Bela Lugosi's Dead", I wanted to see more of them. I guess the only thing to recommend is the love scene between Susan Sarandon and Catherine Deneuve, basically big budget softcore porn with big stars. I can't imagine that this movie ranks high on either one's personal portfolio. It's frustrating because if a lot had been stripped out and the film focused on Deneuve's attempts to replace lovers and Sarandon's battle with her vampirism, it could have been a good gothic horror film but instead, we get a commercial.

How far would you go to be eternally youthful? If you're Miriam (Catherine Deneuve), you turn men and women into vampires and keep them encased in crypts once they start to deteriorate and look like death. She and her current lover (David Bowie) are looking for a cure to his rapid aging symptoms and they meet a doctor (played by Susan Sarandon) who might just be able to help. But will she be drawn into Miriam's seductive web herself?

As directed by Tony Scott, The Hunger is a triumph of style over substance. It mostly feels like a first draft script that has, somehow, been elevated by Scott's inventive staging, gorgeous photography, and the chemistry between the main trio of actors.

The Hunger isn't the kind of movie you watch for gripping dialogue or mind bending plot twists. It's a simple story, well told and well shot. Deneuve drenches the screen in her charisma throughout in a role that doesn't require her to say much, so it's an even greater feat that she's able to tell the audience everything they need to know from her body language and facial expressions. Sarandon gets the most full character in the film and she handles it with her typical professionalism even if she seems to be under the spell of a bad haircut. Still, The Hunger is, more or less, Bowie's film for the first 30 minutes or so and he's the one we identify with the most. He's been both blessed and cursed with eternal life, but a failing body. Bowie captures this terror beautifully and his is the character we think most about when the film comes to an end.

Even if you're not traditionally a big vampire movie fan, The Hunger might just satisfy your thirst for a well made, intriguing horror film.

Roger Ebert found The Hunger ¨an agonizingly bad vampire movie, circling around an exquisitely effective sex scene.¨ Certainly, in his first feature film, Tony Scott already set his future standards for style over content. (or did perhaps he only need an excuse for getting Catherine Deneuve and Susan Sarandon in bed together?) Style's OK, but plot coherence might help a little. This is just a polished lesbian fantasy posed aggressively as a horror flick, which resulted weird and hardly satisfactory.