Back to Lestat. He's mysterious, sexy, dark, dangerous, funny, sarcastic, handsome and sometimes he can be completely innocent and gullible. And I completely understand his love for humanity and for humans. He wasn't given a choice, he was turned against his will, so the fact that he wants, needs actually, to be human again, is understandable.
I mentioned that sometimes he's gullible. I don't mean he's stupid, just that his desire to be "good" and as "beautiful" as he sees the humans clouds his judgement. But that's ok for me, because, as you probably know already, I love imperfect characters.
Over the years I've heard a lot of opinions about Lestat and the other vampires from Anne Rice's books. Most of those opinions were the same, saying that Armand was the perfect vampire of this series. Really? For someone holding a grudge over something that happened more than a hundred years he sounds pretty imperfect to me. I think Lestat is better than Armand. While Armand had the chance to grow and develop under Marius's care and he is also older than Lestat, I feel like Lestat is more... he feels like the better vampire to me.
Comparing Lestat from the books to the Lestat we see in the movies, I have to say I believe Stuart Townsend played him better than Tom Cruise. While I'm a fan of the early movies of Tom Cruise, I feel like Lestat wasn't as bad in the book. Yes, he is still the villain, both in the book and in the movie, but I think that in the movie he was exaggerated.
And while Tom Cruise managed to show him how bad Lestat could get at some point, I think Stuart Townsend managed to show the "real" Lestat. He showed that Lestat could be flirty ("I'm very ticklish" *drools*), dangerous (the park scene), adventurous, completely helpless, sarcastic, sexy. I could go on, but I'd probably end up reviewing the entire movie, which is not the point right now.