#(​expect lots of lestat posting)

[radiantlestat]

hi guys!! while i’m not new to tumblr, i am relatively new to the iwtv fandom and i’m looking for some new mutuals and blogs to follow 🥹

pls interact with this post if you post about iwtv and are interested in becoming mutuals. i’d love to get to know everyone! ♡

[kuwdora]

all my netflix witcher peeps this week losing their minds with all the new photos and articles. love to see it.

[fallingbyjuleecruise]

genuinely feel that the drama happening in the amc iwtv fandom is what happens when fans promote a show bc it’s gay first and do not mention the plot/genre at all

[olderthannetfic]

I'm IWTV-wank-avoidance-asking Anon and it kinda missed me that it would be a wanky topic lol I was trying to see if the show is worth watching. A lot of my mutuals are posting IWTV gifs so I assume it's good, but I was curious if anyone who read the novel would think "Better read the novel". I don't realize an asking-for-rec ask would be wanky, but now that I think about who the writer is, it kinda makes sense. My bad lol

--

Ahahahaha.

Around here, I don't think anyone is precious enough about Anne Rice to start the genuine version of this wank, but Rice fandom can be... uh... very intense even on top of Rice herself having been the queen of drama.

You know about Red Beans Anne Rice, right?

Many years ago, Anne got all butthurt about a tacky-ass restaurant taking over an abandoned building that she'd had Lestat being emo in in one of the books. Instead of gothic atmosphere, it was now very PINK and LOUD. So she wasted money taking out ads in the local paper as Lestat trying to shame the restaurant owner... at which point a bunch of other restaurant owners also wasted money to respond in newspaper ads saying that they welcomed fellow businesspeople. It all ended in the restaurant's grand opening and people with plates of "Red beans Anne Rice" (i.e. red beans and rice).

--

Anyway, I read the first book back in the 90s when I was like 15. It's decent from what I remember. The thing that made it iconic when it came out in 1976 was that it was pretty heavily pushing the vampire=drug addict metaphor. This is everywhere in sexy goth sadboi vampire media now, but it wasn't as much of a thing at the time.

It was also very, very gay but in that way where (at least in the first book), nobody really says the word. That meant something in the 70s. Even by the 90s, it wasn't such a big deal, and it's a big nothingburger in the 2020s.

Book 1 is Rice dealing with the death of her child. It's all about suicidal feelings and Catholic weirdness. The main character is Louis, a.k.a. Rice's self-insert (which she confirmed herself).

Books 2 onward are about Lestat's dick.

He becomes a rockstar, vampire-bones the ur vampire, which causes him to mega level up, thus enabling him to thwart her plot to kill all men on earth aside form a few for breeding purposes, bodyswaps so he has a working penis again, fucks a nun, swaps back, gets Louis back by trying to commit suicide and accidentally getting a tan, etc... Much, much later books are about the other bonkers vampires, most of them more in the horny rockstar mold than the sad mommy of dead baby one.

In book 1, Louis is a depressed plantation owner who eats a bunch of his slaves among other fucked up shit. Claudia, their vampire daughter, is a small child who is upset about being stuck as a kid forever. One of the more disturbing parts is when Louis finds out she's fucking adult men. Lestat turns out to be a French nobleman with mommy issues despite Louis thinking he was only pretending to be upper class.

-- The TV series moved the entire plot much later in history, made Louis black, and gave him a spine. Some racists cried about this and some of tumblr cried about how it was offensive to take the plantation owner and make him black instead of doing that with the other one.

The show also made it more overt that Lestat is an abusive jackass boyfriend. This apparently came as a surprise to people with poor reading comprehension. Others have wanked about fans still liking Louis/Lestat instead of Louis/less terrible boyfriends. But... like... It's IWTV. What did they expect?

(So yes, some book fans will be immensely wanky about the show. Ignore them.)

Also, I hear they fuck on the show? Rice's vampires don't have working junk, which we know because Lestat stands in front of an entire wall of mirrors in the most bougie bathroom ever in Akasha's evil lair and discusses how his penis—I mean "The Organ"—no longer does anything.

Also, Armand in the books is the 14-year-old kept boy of a Renaissance painter with a harem of boys or something like that. (It's been a very long time since I read these.) Shit like this never makes it into the adaptations.

--

If you're curious about the history of vampire media or about a certain kind of Southern gothic shit, sure, read the books, particularly the first one with its radically different tone and much greater historical importance.

The old movie is a decent adaptation of book 1, though it makes it less gay (or at least removes Louis' weird boner for his dead brother) and messes with the ending in a way that would have made sequels veer off from the books. I haven't seen that other old movie with Aaliyah, but it looks like a campy time capsule of baaaad movies of that era.

Anyway, no, you don't need to read the book before watching the show. They changed a massive amount of stuff.

I'm in more of a Chinese media phase right now, but a bunch of friends have watched and said the show is genuinely good.

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV S2 Musings - Tentative Timeline (Pt2: The Trial)

I've been struggling with this for a while, cuz this ish just don't make sense, AMC. (I fully expect S3 to gotcha/retcon/fix stuff, esp. since who knows what Armand's tinkered around with in Louis' head.) I split this timeline in 2 parts: Pt1 has everything from 2x1 - 2x6ish (text & chart versions of timeline); and Pt2 covers as much as I can understand from the Trial's shenanigans. (I'm just one person tryna figure out wtf is going on, so if y'all have any insights, please share!)

I've been grappling with the sequence of events that led to the Trial since 2x6 aired, when Armand "could not prevent" his CHOICE to stand back and let Louis' family be abducted & tortured & killed.

Armand was actually in cahoots with Santiago the whole time (writing/directing/editing the Trial script); so was he also lying/making excuses about why THE most powerful vampire with the Mind Gift wasn't reading his own coven's thoughts?

So, since we know Armand put false memories into Lou's head about the Trial (which ofc makes Louis' account more difficult to parse), and we know Armand knew all about Lestat/Bruce since the very first day, I've just been wondering how early the Trial was planned out.

Cuz the BIG question everyone's circling around is WHEN Lestat arrived in Paris, and WHY he didn't warn Louis that the coven was planning something.

Theories range from:

Les willingly participated in the Trial, deliberately acting with ill intent cuz he was mad about Mardi Gras; "it's their turn to hurt." Lesdaughter Truthers are wrong, Les DGAF about Claudia.

Les was unable to warn Louis or stop the Trial cuz he was captured, injured & manipulated/mind-fogged (a la the book canon)

Sam Reid (deliberately?) hemmed & hawed about Lestat going into the rehearsal/Trial acting on raw impulse, with no plan whatsoever, other than getting Louis (specifically) out alive

NGL, I think ALL of the above are to some degree true! 😅

But I lean toward Theory #2 most of all, cuz that's how the book events transpired. But I'll be the first to admit that #2 is deeply flawed & hard AF to defend/prove, based on what little we actually saw in 2x6, 2x7, and esp. 2x8. Cuz it really does seem like Les LET an awful lot of bad ish happen that he too could've prevented.

So I wanna put 2x6 into context this time, to try and piece things together. Cuz the math REALLY ain't mathin, AMC.

What we have thus far:

According to Armand in 2x8, he started lying to Louis about the coven preparing the Trial the night Madeleine was Turned in 2x6.

November 1945

Armand knew the FIRST NIGHT Louis & Claudia arrived in Summer 1945 that they were lying about Lestat/"Bruce."

Spring 1946 - Spring 1947

The coven was suspicious the entire time--it's esp. obvs. as Santiago grills them about "Chicago":

Santiago vs Claudia (2x3) around Spring 1946, "Stick with it, Puce! You're almost there."

Santiago vs Louis (2x4) around Spring 1947, "New Orleans!" (It makes sense that it would take Santiago longer to confront Louis, as Armand kept complaining about Louis never being around the Theatre x x)

Late 1947 / Early 1948

post-September 1947, Santiago had already stolen Claudia's diaries & passed them around to the coven; and Celeste & Estelle had already interrogated Roget about Lestat.

Did Armand know Santiago was in Louis' apartment going through their things (while Claudia would either be out with Madeleine, or at the Theatre under curfew) --

--and did he know the coven was reading her Diaries right in front of him while Santiago & Celeste & Estelle were interrogating Roget about Lestat?

Esp. since all of this goes down in 2x6 BEFORE Armand had even met Madeleine & Louis/Claudia asked him to Turn her!

We know that by late 1947 / early 1948 (when Louis bought the Wols, then came home to find Claudeleine in his coffin, then took them to Armand to ask for the bite), Armand already knows that Lou & Claudia wanna do their own thing with Madz; committing the same "crime" that got Santiago's Maker killed--making a vamp without the Coven Master's permission--but ofc, Louis is NOT in Armand's coven.

Late 1948 - Early 1949

In the very next scene, we get Santiago & Sam in cahoots about Godot's projections/scripts. Patterns of behavior indicate that Armand LET this all happen, and only pretended that "the buffoon was in the audience."

In my Timeline Pt1, I surmised that the very latest Sam could've finished the Godot script was early 1949, cuz IRL Sam Beckett wrote the play b/t October 1948 - January 1949.

Spring - Summer 1949

So by Spring of 1949, Sam would be free to turn his attention to drafting a NEW script...for the Trial.

April 1949: Sam writes the Trial script.

(Is it JUST his half, or is Les already awake & in Paris & writing the other half with him? OR is Les awake & just in telepathic communication with the coven, and has no idea they're asking him questions to incriminate Claudia & Louis?)

2x5 & 2x6 also give us some very important contextual dates! Loumand references a bunch of events that happened around the same time, which can help approximate when Tuan's projections were being made.

LOUIS: The Berlin Blockade ended in May. The Geneva Convention was agreed in August. Some of the front pages from that year. But if you look in the filler, in the back pages. Strange crimes reported. ARMAND: A telescopic lens stolen from the Observatory at Meudon. A film company shooting the crime thriller 'Porte D'Orient' delayed when its inventory of color film stock is snatched. LOUIS: A gang of drunkards, hanging off of the side of the Eiffel Tower, all facing south by southwest, all muttering in unison--gone by the time police arrive by elevator. ARMAND: Crimes all left unsolved.

May 12, 1949: Berlin Blockade ends

June 21, 1949: Paris Observatory's missing lens reported stolen. (Because these are newspaper reports, we might also assume the actual time of the theft was the night before the article was published (June 20). But who knows.)

June 23, 1949: Oriental Port color film stock reported stolen; filming delayed. (Because these are newspaper reports, we might also assume the actual theft of the events was the night before the article was published (June 22). But who knows.)

The color film stock being stolen that delayed Oriental Port's filming is a VERY nice touch, cuz the movie was released in 1950, and was the first French film to use Agfa-Gevacolor film, which had only been available to the public since January 1949 (x x). So the film nerds at AMC really stay on top of their research! 👌

July 1949: Armand distracts Louis with library outings:

ARMAND: Ah, July, 1949. The reading room. LOUIS: Mmm. We broke into the same library every night that month, hypnotized security, as one does, flipped the lights, laid our backs on long tables and stared up at the ceiling. ' DANIEL: Hot. ARMAND: Iron pillars holding up terracotta domes, a light trick that made the ceiling appear higher than it was. LOUIS: And why not pass a month that way? An effortless, eternal life ahead of us. Funny thing, trying to remember what occupied one's time when one was ignorant of the plotting around him.DANIEL: Grab that. LOUIS: Santiago had broken into our apartme--I'm sorry. Grab what?

Louis implies that the "plotting around him" started in July 1949--or at least, that's when HE surmised (in Dubai, NOT Paris) that Armand had "started lying to me." Ofc, 2x8 would reveal that Armand was in cahoots with the coven since jump.

We can thus assume that this was when the bulk of the projector images based on Claudia's diaries were being drawn (whenever Armand wasn't distracting Louis with dates to the library). They already have the Agfa-Gevacolor film, and the Observatory's fancy projection lens, so that Tuan can animate whatever Sam had already written for the script. "But they had their Technicolor film. Tuan Pham's wizardry with it."

And ofc, they'd want to corroborate the diaries with Lestat's own testimony. (Esp. since it's clear from Claudia's diaries that Les ISN'T dead, just thrown in the dump--cuz Claudia KNOWS the only way to be sure you've killed a vamp is to burn them, and she's mad AF that they didn't do that to Les cuz Lou freaked TF out.)

Again: did they only call Lestat after they had Claudia's diaries (once they knew there was a chance he wasn't dead after all)? The dates seem to imply that this was the case--that Armand & Santiago & co. had suspected Lestat was alive ever since 1945, but it was only until 1949 that they bothered to contact him.

Fall 1949

September 5, 1949: report of Eiffel Tower climbed by "muttering drunkards." (Because these are newspaper reports, we might also assume the actual time of the events was the night before the article was published (Sept 4). But who knows.)

The September 5th date is the most telling: IF Armand is telling truth, this would be when the coven contacted Lestat, as seen in Tuan's projection during the Trial.

So, IF this is the truth & S3 doesn't retcon anything, the rehearsals with Lestat would've had to have started in September, after 3 months of Tuan's prep (the thefts started in June); and 5 months of Sam's writing & Armand's edits.

February 6, 1940 - September 5, 1949: Lestat's "state of repose" ends when the coven "wakes" him. (IF this is true, Roget was right that Les was just asleep, taking a long AF dirt nap. IF Les was awake before then, he was only motivated to come to Paris when the coven climbed the Eiffel Tower & told him the Trial was soon--likely still too emotionally damaged / psychologically injured to leave NOLA.)

Again, the big question is: what was Les up to while he was in Paris, b4 the Trial? Was he free to come & go as he pleased (in which case: why TF didn't he warn Lou?!); OR was he locked up (a la the books)?

post-September 5, 1949: Madeleine is Turned.

Right after the scene of Dubai!Loumand describing all the "strange crimes," we get the scene of Paris!Loumand in the park, discussing Madz, right b4 she's Turned that night (Lou's in the same clothes).

THIS is the night Armand claimed he started lying to Lou, ("They gave me a choice"). And again: we know even THAT was a lie too, cuz UNLESS Madz was turned the exact same night that Les arrived AND wrote his half of the script AND rehearsed it (meaning Les wasn't starved/tortured at all), then Armand had PLENTY of time BEFORE Madz Turned to work on the script & direct the rehearsals.

The same night of Madz's Turning, Armand moves into Louis' apartment (and Claudia's coffin 🤮), with his magnolia sprig. And speaking of plants....

September-October-ish, 1949: Claudeleine finds the X, planting flowers outside Saint Denis.

I assume "cold things" are the cold corpses Claudeleine is burying; that "become warm" metaphorically, when plants/flowers grow over their graves. I know nothing about autumn weather in France. Going by clothes, it looks like it's still nice & warm, cut comfy enough for light jackets. I also know nothing about flowers, or what seasons they grow in France. But apparently Claudeleine's Fall flowers are fine:

Lavender: usually stops flowering in late August or mid-September; definitely by mid-October.

Sweet Iris: has high cold resistance, and goes dormant from November - March-ish.

Peony: apparently there are regular peonies & tree peonies, and they both like colder weather--the regular ones go dormant around November. Plenty seem to be ok in Fall, up to October-ish, that you can get at nurseries. And they really like bone meal as fertilizer, omg. XD

(My headcanon wants to assume that Claudia only agreed to visit Louis in Paris either cuz it was gonna be her birthday (9/21), OR his birthday (10/4). 💔 Cuz misogynoir, I'd bet Monopoly money it was Claudia's; DOOMED by the narrative! 😭)

Late 1949 (September/October): The Trial.

(Guys. D'you reckon those nasty theatre kids held the Trial on frikkin Halloween? 🤣)

Late 1949 (November-ish): Louis is kept buried alive in the wet room for at least 1 month after the Trial, before Armand finally pulls him out the coffin.

The latest the Trial could've taken place is October, in order for OVER a month to have passed and the fire still happens in 1949.

VERY Late 1949 (November/December): Louis slaughters the coven, the "Great Fire of 1949" send the Theatre des Vampires up in flames. 🔥

(The Talamasca folder in 2x3 calls it the "Great Fire;" which makes me giddy, cuz we also have the "Great Burnings" in the books, related to Akasha. I love how Akasha & Louis are paralleled, just slaughtering vamps with the Fire Gift, bless.)

1950

May 24 - June 4, 1950: The French Championship of 1950 takes place at Roland-Garros. Spoiler: the Australians lost that year. 😂

[nalyra-dreaming]

'it always is and always was about the shipping'…i'm more & more thinking this is true! imho certain fans only started hating on the show & getting outraged about s3 being tvl (which rolin told us about from day one!!) when things didn't go their way wrt loumand. it's like they finally realized they bet on the wrong horse so they want the show to fail now.

imho s2 ended on a v hopeful note for louis. if anyone was really that worried for his future relevance you'd think the show re-affirming that loustat are soulmates & their relationship is the core of the show would be a good thing, not bad?? it means that even if lestat's the main focus for now, louis will still be central. louis & lestat are co-leads. one or the other may get more screentime in a given season/arc depending on where the story's at rn, but it all comes back to them. so either these fans are just clutching at straws for things to gripe about, or they were in denial about what a tvl season would mean? like did they think the writers were gonna frame lestat as the villain during his own season or that loumand would team up to 'defeat' him lmao? i don't wanna sound harsh but i really don't get what they even expected?

It's always been and always will be about the shipping. There's some great posts by @cbrownjc about that, too.

And yeah well, you wouldn't believe some of the asks I got back then, where people expected Louis to do a Blade and go after Lestat and "his gang" in the upcoming seasons.... (for example).

There were a LOT of people after s1 who expected this to be about the "good vampire" who goes after the bad ones, and "since the show was totally different to the books"... that the show would not be doing the books.

And now, that that is rather clearly not the case... a lot of people are not getting the show they made up in their heads. And that frustrates them.

I get that frustration, to an extent :) But everyone on and surrounding the show talked about doing the books and which books, too, from the beginning.

Like, Rolin Jones is on record with this:

(That particular image also always comes to mind when people wonder how the show can be called IWTV and go to other books now...)

The ones whining about it all now simply did not want to listen.

[adamnablelittledevil]

Reacting to The Vampire Lestat - Part III (with a bit of spoilers)

I like Gabrielle.

I'm not sure I love her, but I really like her.

I feel wrong using feminine pronouns with her, though. I feel like Gabrielle is whispering in my ear that is they/them. Like, I've never had a headcanon so strong before? I don't know about labels, but for me those are the pronouns Gabrielle would use. It's just so clear to me.

I won't use them because the book doesn't do it, the fandom doesn't do it, which I'm not criticizing because it isn't exactly 'official', so it wouldn't be real canon to... But I feel like if the books were released today, it would be. And I hope the show changes that and we can gradually adjust too.

I hope that when they write season 3, they show signs of her gender dysphoria even before she says something explicit like the "you're the man in me" conversation. I want lines that imply that, I want a look in her eyes and expressions on her face whenever she gets gender envious of guys or has to do something "feminine". The book doesn't do a lot of that because Lestat is the narrator and he is away from her, so we barely see her before the transformation/'transition' but the show has the opportunity to explore more of it and I hope they use it.

Gabrielle was born to be a vampire. I think she would nail it even without Lestat's counseling. It's just second nature for her. You go, bruh!

Gabrielle actually seems to be more fun and even affectionate than I expected? I was worried that she'd might be too confident, powerful, badass, empowered etc that she would feel cold and emotionless, because that's usually what happens with characters like these and I hate that... But so far it hasn't been the case.

She really blossomed with vampirism. Feels like she is finally getting the opportunity to have the life she was meant to live.

The only downside is the hair. That moment with the hair was so visceral. I feel bad for her. Imagine being stuck with a hair you hate and gives you body dysphoria forever. I hope the show lets her hair be short. Like, maybe her illness affected her hair or something. Or at least give her hairstyles that make it look shorter than it really is. Or make her cut it every day. I don't care. Let the dude have short hair! Period.

Lestat's reaction to all this is like... Mixed feelings. He doesn't love it. Which, I get it, all his life he knew her as a "woman". It can be weird adjusting to that, it may feel like you're losing someone. But there are these gentle moments when he separates accessories (if I remember it correctly, rings) that are masculine for her because he figures she would prefer them and when he says he'll cut her hair every night if she wants to, so it's more of unlearning and grieving what/who he thought was 'real' and adapting to a new reality. It's not an "okay, let's go!" reaction as if nothing happened, specially for the time being (1700s), it's complicated, but he seems to be open. I can't speak for everyone who is trans and/or under the non-binary umbrella, but it was human to me and I have no problems with it.

Alright, so whether it was incestuous before or not, now it clearly is. I do hope it started now and not when they were human, though.

She was my mother, my fledgling, my child (sort of), my roommate, basically the only friend I had and my lover. I mean, not exactly, but I thought the joke was funny.

I feel like if I talk about the incest, it has to be on another post because it would probably take too long. There are way too many things to talk about and I'm still approaching the middle of the book.

Let's just say it sort of makes works with how the book, the characters, this species and universe are written. I can sort of get it, at least for now. Is it necessary? No. Would the show suffer if they don't do the incest? Not all. Is it random, irrelevant, only for shock value and because "let's get nasty freaky and controversial these are vampires and this is gothic horror grow up cupcakes deal with it hahaha"? Also no! It has some kind of logic. But I feel like Lestat and Gabrielle are already layered enough with their parent/child/maker/fledgling/sort of envious of each other (including the fact they're both gender nonconforming to some extent) dynamic on its own, that there's plenty to cover here without incest. Still, if the show goes there (and I'm afraid they will), I also expect it to make sense and not be just for the sake of being seual, weird and controversial. I believe Rolin is too good to write something that mediocre and poor. So, I can live without it, but I'm also trusting the show to do whatever their thing is. Let's see, I guess.

Also, at least at the moment, it's not as big as people make it out to be. Again, to talk about this properly I'd need another post, but it's not like they sleep together, they're head over heels in love with each other or anything. Like I said, there's some logic that is kind of complicated to explain here, but it's not that radical and it's not that often. Sometimes I even genuinely and wholeheartedly forget about it. Fortunately, there are way too many other (and more) interesting things going on to focus on.

Gabrielle learning about her powers is really fun too, maybe even more fun than Lestat since she's such a natural at this whole thing.

And their maker/fledgling dynamic is entertaining as well.

She's like, climbing walls, jumping from roofs etc like a cat, just having the time of her life and while Lestat gets pretty adventurous and experimental with his powers too, it's not as much? Gabrielle takes it to the next level (good for her).

Like, sometimes he has to stop Gabrielle like a father with his kid, like "CAN WE PLEASE JUST GO HOME WE CAN DO MORE TOMORROW" and it's simply hilarious.

Stop it, Lestat, let Gabrielle HAVE FUN!

Gabrielle just gives major Cat Woman vibes. Now I need Cat Woman-esque scenes on the show with her climbing and jumping between buildings etc. WE HAVE SO MUCH POTENTIAL AND THE VISION IS CO CLEAR. Do it, Rolin!

It's cool that Lestat finally has some real company and someone with whom he can be open about being a vampire.

Loneliness is the biggest thing for him on the show and I have a feeling it's the same thing on the books. And it's even worse here, because there are moments where he is completely alone and in so much pain (and we haven't seen that on the show yet). Having Gabrielle around made things better for him and he hasn't cried in a little while (and he was crying A LOT on those first two chapters, for very understandable reasons), so this was a nice turn for him and the story.

I also think he enjoys being her mentor, like it gives him a sense of purpose and pride. Reminds me of how he talked about the way he felt at the monastery. And it's sweet to see him teaching Gabrielle stuff.

And sometimes he feels like an old and tired single dad and it's just funny. Like, Gabrielle is ready to create the vampire Olympics and win gold for every single sport and he just wants to sleep. Lestat is too much and loves playing around, but Gabrielle is too much even for HIM. Imagine having more energy than the actual ADHD child. What a legend. They're hilarious. A lot of room to play with humor with these two and I hope they use it.

P.S. Nothing is permanent, opinions might change and this is based on Lestat’s narration, which can be unreliable. I’m reading the books so I can find out more about the characters, what potential events might happen in the show, what I can expect etc. This is my favorite show in the universe, so I want to be as informed as possible. I have no idea if I’ll become a legit fan of the books or not, but so far I’m enjoying it. I’m posting these comments only for fun.

[confirmeddead]

My thoughts on the SDCC season 3 Vampire Lestat teaser 🩸

Really excited about the format! I knew they’d switch it up from what we saw in Dubai and this is literally what I was hoping it would be. I think I mentioned it in my season 3 greenlit post that I wanted it to be Daniel interviewing him in various cities as he toured. Lestat is too unpredictable to want to sit and recount his story in such a stale way ala Louis in Dubai.

I *think* this is just a teaser that gives the vibes on what we can expect, I don’t think these are actual clips from the season. This had to have been filmed recently given Sam’s fresh balayage 😂 (I KNEW he’d done it for a reason…) and I DO think filming will begin this year and go into next year.

Daniel being part of the interview was, of course, expected. He was so excited to write a sequel, release vamp sex toys, etc. Of course he said yes to Lestat (I think Lestat went to him because TVL was Lestat wanting to tell his story- so this is all agreed to and on his terms).

The dynamic between Daniel and Lestat will be so fun. Sam said somewhere that of course they’d fight but they’d also get along. Daniel is a wise-cracking, experienced person. He’s been through a lot and I’m sure Lestat will like going back and forth with him.

So no cast reveals! I can’t think when they’ll reveal the big three (Gabrielle, Marius, and Akasha) but I’m hoping it’s not just a press release. These are MAJOR vampire chronicles characters, I need them to be revealed in front of fans! New York Comic Con is in October 2024. While I’d like for them to be filming by then, maybe this could happen right before filming begins? Idk

I won’t pretend to have any idea what they’ll do with Louis 😭 it won’t be anything from the books, of course, because he was barely in TVL.

With how much a fanboy Rolin is for TVL (like, totally valid), I don’t expect a lot of present-day Armand. Of course we will see him in the 18th century! Okay idk why I made this into a theory post but I’ll cut it out.

This teaser was really, really good. TVL was when I started loving Lestat as a character and everything about him (his past, his family) made him make a lot of sense to me. He’s so chaotic and Sam is gonna kill it. If this becomes a Vampire Lestat stan account, don’t say I didn’t warn you (but Armand/Assad will always be my #1 🩷)

[romanticizingmurder]

I think the idea of Lestat as Marius's favorite is kind of overblown? Marius certainly loves Lestat, and I think Armand believes or at least worries about Marius favoring him:

So it's not like I don't get where this comes from.

But I'd argue he treats Lestat nearly identically (in terms of big events, he's obviously not out here macking on him).

He hears Armand crying and seeks him out and brings him home.

He sees and hears Lestat seeking him out and finds him and brings him home.

And I see a lot of people follow Armand's logic and then go "but he doesn't rescue Armand from the cult but he forgives Lestat talking about The Parents". The thing is. I don't think this is good comparison to Armand and the cult. For whatever reason, I can come up with a few ideas, I don't think Marius was truly that upset nor really expected Lestat to keep the secret. He doesn't have the visceral reaction to it that he does to Armand accepting the cult (not blaming Armand here, not saying blaming Armand is good).

But we do actually see Marius react to Lestat doing something unexcuably stupid. And what happens? When Lestat fully betrays all advice given to him by everyone and lets his body be taken over? Not only does Marius refuse to help him, he even makes sure Lestat sees him refusing to help - at least when he went to watch Armand with the cult, he didn't reveal himself and make the rejection clear:

Marius has, and you can come up with any number of reasons as to why this is and it's not the point of this post, a habit of essentially ghosting people when he reaches a certain level of emotion. He leaves Pandora, he doesn't try to unbrainwash Armand, and he refuses to directly help Lestat.

It's also worth noting that in both Armand and Lestat's case, he doesn't help them but he also doesn't particularly hinder them. By the time he's recovered enough to check on Armand and find him killing innocents, Marius doesn't actually try to interfere despite his horror at it - nor does he try to destroy Lestat's body before Lestat has a chance to recover it.

I think the idea that Marius treats Lestat measurably better than Armand largely just focuses on his and Lestat's relationship in its very early stages, when the wider picture shows Marius still in his same patterns with Lestat as he was with Armand and Pandora. Which is to say: I don't think Lestat is Marius's golden boy or his favorite, I don't think he treats Armand worse than Lestat.

(I might even go so far as to say I suspect if you actually compared Awful Things done by them, Marius is willing to completely ignore and forgive significantly more of Armand's past post-reunion than he is of anyone else, at least as seen in how he treats them)

[manynarrators]

Y’alllllll, I miiiiight be coming out of QotD with a new ship. And godamnit, I go from my Lestat/Armand ship (comparative rare pair with little content) to drumroll please, sprinkle in a bit of rising tension!

Something even rarer and virtually non-existent! Khayman/Armand. I want to read fic for them. There is no fic. I have thoughts about it, I think it could be So Good.

If I want fic for them I’m going to have to write it myself, aren’t I?

It sounds like such a crack pairing but I have logic!

The first is that Khayman is immediate taken in by Armand. But not just because he’s pretty, which is a part of it. But also the amount of power Armand has, notable for someone young(er). There’s respect! I’m here for someone ending up with Armand who isn’t scared of him, but is still aware he’s not weak.

And then throughout the whole middle portion of the book from Khayman’s perspective, he’s constantly looking for Armand! He keeps thinking things along the line of “I have to go to Armand, I want to try and protect him” which considering Akasha is quite literally going around murdering a ton of vampires at that moment, isn’t exactly patronizing! Still sweet though.

Armand is a bit cold towards him, but also he’s having A Day, and I think he’s not at his best for some logical reasons!

Now I to what is infinitely more like… personal reasons. The one that made me write the post: I think it would make Marius so upset, for a couple of reasons. The first is just that Khayman is incredibly old, and incredibly powerful. Six thousand years, compared to two. Not only is his beloved fledgling moving on with someone else, but someone even more of an ancient than him!

The second is that Armand is consistently made a spectacle because of his beauty. And Khayman is… unsettling. He’s got some aspects of beauty to him, according to Marius, but, on the whole, so old and inhuman it’s cycled around to terrifying. And I love the idea of Armand saying “no, I like him”.

The last one that I can think of for the moment is the fact that Armand and Khayman are both odd. Odd in a distinctly vampire way. Like half of what Armand says in TVL and IWTV is telepathically, he doesn’t move in the way of a human, he is, of the core cast of vampires, probably the least human acting one. Khayman hits a lot of the same vibes. They also both have a fascination with the modern world and learning about that. Give me these two old vampires learning about the world, but also without judgement that comes from being unsettling, or expecting to blend in more.

Like I’m all for Armand learning to be human, but also I am SO HERE for my vampires being well, vampires, with the goose-bump raising, cat-scaring unsettling nature that comes with. I think it’s got some of the appeal of show Devils Minions, just in a way I think has intriguing potential I want to poke around in.

This has been my TED Talk!

[waterghoulcalamity]

all this discourse on twt about who gets to sit on whose lap seems so strange, forced and honestly dumb to me because—for context: someone posted the picture below with the caption being something like "some pls draw loustat like this.

all fun and games until they start posting the fanart and most of them it's lestat sitting on louis's lap which i, admittedly, figured that people wouldn't be happy with because i've always had the impression that this fandom (at least the twt side) views lestat through a more masculine lenses and you can see this in a lot of loustat fanfiction that he takes the role of the "man" in the relationship, with louis being the wife, and don't much like it when lestat takes more feminine/soft role in the relationship. me however, i was happy that people were starting to be more open to shed the heteronormative glasses and the roles and whathot, and have fun with cute fanart but yeah, no.

to my surprise (or maybe not) the discourse was how "some people" (derogatory) expect louis to take the role of the man because he's a black man (what) and lestat the woman because he's white (again, what) and the entire time i'm sitting there confused because this never crossed my mind and, from my perspective, this wasn't even something that was happening in real life?? I don't know, i tend to not involve myself with discourse because i find it exhausting, but i guess this one caught my attention due to how out of nowhere it seemed.

admittedly, i don't think i'm the right person to talk about race. while i'm not white, i'm also not american, and in my country race is not the first thing that pops to mind when we think of the source of issues, but I understand that it is different in america, so perhaps they're right and i'm the one who's being disrespectful and underreacting? who knows.

well, i've rambled plenty, sorry again. i guess that, ultimately, i'd just like it if people stopped making discourse out of everything and started focusing on having fun and enjoying the show that they like a little more, not everything has to be about a group being wrong and another being right. sometimes it's okay to enjoy a joke.

[storyteller-aprendiz]

So maybe I am wrong but I don't think you can gendered Louis & Armand, the way you do Loustat.

Because neither Louis nor Armand are really the "housewife" in the situation. In Dubai and SF is Louis' initiative and therefore his business but Armand does have an equal role on it, tho Louis is the more capitalist/investment savy, Armand is like the one to schedule talks with buyers, help fix the houses etc. It is not Armand's home, like Louis moving into Lestat's, is THEIR home, both in Dubai and SF.

And like even if the bullshit with the books (which tf) and the tree are definitely Armand, the art, the furniture even the gray are Louis' (cause he's grieving). Like for me the Dubai penthouse is like a reflection of Louis' self/soul "You are in my coffin" as much as a manifestation of Armand controlling tendencies.

I saw a post about exactly this, like how Armand & Louis relationship is a Depiction of how even in the queerest of models and types of relationships abuse can still take part if people are not willing to question the systems, dynamics or just plane different levels of power their members have.

And then we have the D/S dynamic. Kink and BDSM are already shamed upon in our heteronormative society, because they play with the power dynamics that already exist in the relationship, and they create a separte extructure through safe-words and after care and good old communication in which both member can consent to those dynamics, be safe and most important GET PLEASURE from them.

And like, Armand as the powerfull abusive partner Technically, considering our heteropatriarchal lense should be dominant, but he gladly relinquished it to Louis. Which is a role we don't expect from the patriarch of the house.

Plus all of Louis' boys, means he has a sexual freedom that is not allowed to the "housewife". Though, of course that extend of freedom is still determine/manage by Armand, but not in the sense of Louis is sexually his, ergo he can't be with x. But rather Louis might get Hurt, so I need to control him, for his sake.

Which is why Armands abuse looks more to me like care-taker abuse than like the heteropatriarcal shit Lestat does.

Which I think, is also because Armand being a racialized man with a learned helplessness ingrained to him, really can't like inhabit the same role Lestat does in a home. He will always be a step down, cause masculinity and male privilege gets further away (or like changes? I think that's a better way to put it) the more marginalization you inhabit. Which also makes a lot of men of color double down in what little power it does grant's them (sometimes going to bigger like displays of power than the subtler types of white men), which you could argue Armand also goes for/participates in with the staging of the trial.

I hope anything I wrote here makes sense. But yeah, I think that the patriarchal husband/edwardian wife comparison even if it works as a lense to analyze Loustat, it falls apart for Louis & Armand.

[ileftmysoulinnorway]

We all had a tough end of the week, so I thought I would put together something about my IWTV set lurking experience in Prague, hopefully to cheer someone up and show you that the people working on our little show are incredible, everything is well thought out, and we have a lot to look forward to.

Locations

I am confident that Prague will be a good substitute for Paris. I love this post comparing Prague's Théâtre des Vampires location with a real Le Grand Guignol in Paris. But similar care is given to other locations as well.

I like to joke that I enjoyed a month-long tour of Prague's most famous landmarks, only to have the actual filming take place in nondescript alleyways right next to them. But it makes perfect sense. They want to capture the nicer and older parts of the city that suit them, but not anything that would tell you it's Prague.

Production design, costumes

I saw them build everything from scratch on several sets. And I'm in awe. From putting up posters that will probably only appear in the background of a single shot, to street names that fit the exact topography of Paris and make sense in the context of the scenes that take place on them, to storefronts that they really didn't have to pay that much attention to, or a menu at Le Dakar Café that you could only read up close, but someone took the trouble to make it anyway?

And maybe this attention to detail is normal, I don't know, but I still think Mara and her team deserve all the praise they get.

S1 showed us how much attention is paid to the costumes. I can assure you that has not changed. All the hats, coats, capes and dresses. I can't tell you how many times I've been pleasantly surprised. By the choice of colors for Lestat. By how beautifully all of Armand's black clothes come to life with little details.

People

There are so many people (and I mean SO many) working on the show and they all know exactly what is expected of them, everything runs like a well-oiled machine. I haven't seen any problems, any conflicts, any excesses.

I'm not under any illusion that everything was trouble-free, but really the only complaints I heard were about the horrendously hellish schedule (I guess that's normal) and then the occasional person wishing they had finished earlier (they never finished earlier).

They are all heroes to me.

Directors

Levan is the only one I saw. He seems so focused and professional. His "rolling...and action" is unforgettable.

Actors

After six locations and about fifteen scenes (and countless rehearsals and takes), I think I managed to get at least some idea of them, and yes, they really seem to be such nice people.

- Jacob, I don't envy him at all the emotional strain of playing Louis, but at the same time I love his portrait of Louis so much.

- Sam's transformation into Lestat is something to behold.

- Assad was the only one present on every set. I don't think we've fully realized how big a role he's going to have (at least in S2).

- Delainey, Ben, Roxane and everyone else 💜

Scenes

They were far from finished when the strike started, but at least (in my opinion) they got to the last block of episodes. 

I'm not going to pretend to have a concrete idea of what to expect from S2 based on what little I saw. But I do have a few guesses, and I'm insanely excited and thrilled. And, in the case of the 1700s flashbacks, totally confused. I can't believe they're going to do so many unexpected things, or other things so soon.

I truly believe that S2 will not disappoint any of us. We just have to wait a little longer. But if this strike means that everyone gets a better deal and the studios are forced to change their ways, it will be worth the wait.

[ca-suffit]

I think an important thing to remember when discussing Lestat as a queer icon (since it's a topic on the blog lately) is the fact that he's a queer horror icon. That man was never going to be a good man lol. It's exactly how Dr. Frank-n-Furter is a queer icon despite also being a villain and problematic. It's important to see people that we could relate to or admire in some aspects also be completely terrible, to avoid conflating someone you like with someone you who is good/should be imitated. Especially in the context of domestic violence and abuse in queer relationships. I wish this nuance was more present in fandom, because I don't like how people either treat Lestat like he's just a regular queer icon (as in, they ignore the part that makes him a horror to deal with), or diminish his queerness.

I'm also looking forward to people claiming Louis as a queer icon, I have hopes that it will become a more widespread topic as the show simmers, because I also think that Lestat being heralded as a queer icon in the show comes from decades and decades of him being considered one outside of it. This is the firts time (to my knowledge) that Louis has been compelling to the general public, so I guess with time he'll gain more weight in that discussion. I know it might sound too optimistic, given how black queer characters are usually treated, but I'd rather feel like we can go somewhere with this than feeling dejected.

I would write so many things about Lestat's and Louis' queerness and how they differ and interact and affect their lives and the narrative if I had the time. I'd also like to read/hear more about how Louis' queerness interacts and overlaps with his identity as a black man, so if you (or anyone) have any recs I'll gladly take them.

I think the discussion and even the portrayal of DV in queer (and interracial) relationships is a *huge* one for ppl to sidestep and has been one of the most disappointing things here tbh. we *haven't* seen that explored much in queer stories and it's so fucking *common* irl. there's a *lot* to explore there in so many directions, but ppl skip over that all the time just bcuz they don't want anyone to be "mean" to lestat. u can like things and still discuss and criticize them. as u said, look at the rocky horror picture show and the impact that's had. a lot of queer existence in general is always being "other" somehow, and that's why horror is such a good genre for it. to strip that away bcuz u just wanna play rupaul's drag race with lestat is....I mean, ppl can do what they want on their own, but this collective bullshit of forcing others to conform to this too and thinking ur "right" for doing it is a majority of the reason this fandom sucks. most ppl don't even hate lestat tbh, it's these fans that are the problem. nobody lets anyone meet the story where it's at.

I def think, regardless of what the show ends up becoming as a whole, that amc louis has made a huge impact as a black, queer character in major media. I hope ppl continue to analyze him and be inspired by this character and keep it all rolling forward. nobody expected this to be as good as it was at portraying louis and we're blessed af to have jacob in the part too.

god, I don't remember all the good posts I've seen about louis anymore. I tried to even look but I think most were out of the tags and long ago too. I remember a rly good one talking about claudia's relationship to louis and how he prbly wasn't allowed to play with grace's dolls as a kid, so claudia was kind of his "permission" to do that. it also gives a slightly different perspective to claudia's "doll-like" existence, since this was not something explored in louis in the books or 1994 film.

I feel like, if u or anyone is unfamiliar with james baldwin, reading his stuff will give some irl perspective to amc louis too in various ways. equal in paris is a good S2 companion. I think rolin jones even said giovanni's room was an inspiration for S2 too.

[murfpersonalblog]

Thanks for tagging me @little-desi-historian! ❤️

YES, all of this takes me back to something I wanted to touch a lot more on in my original post when it comes to the historical male image, Percy, Lestat, and Matadors; because it truly does link back to how AMC is playing with dandyism and society's expectations about effeminate men.

Dandyism is a form of resistance culture. As I've said before, Lestat flouts gender norms because HE CAN do whatever he wants & get away with it. His androgyny's on a different level: effeminate or masculine, he's still a vampire, a SUPERnatural creature elevated beyond the bounds of social mores that determine what men & women could or SHOULD act/dress like. MANY people across social media have pointed to Lestat's limp wrists, long blonde "Barbie" hair and ESPECIALLY him dressing in drag in Ep7 as proof that he's the "wife/mother/woman/femme fatale" in Lousta's relationship, and THEN claim its either gender essentialism or homophobic/racist to say Louis is CANONICALLY female-coded one in BOTH the books and show (as AR said so). But no, Lestat in drag was a power move, because he doesn't care what anyone thinks/says/does--he'll just eat them. Mockingly eating the baby in a dress was a deliberate bastardization of motherhood/womanhood. Louis is called every homophobic name in the book by those expecting the black man to just take being insulted, but MARQUIS de Lioncourt DEMANDS being crowned KING of Mardi Gras, Krewe of Raj, & he'll show you exactly what he thinks about your silly homophobic hypocritical human society: You're just "the MEAT," let them eat KING Cake--you're his FOOD. Eff y'all, I'm dressed to KILL you, & laugh doing it.

Lestat's behavior is not only derived from the time period he was born & raised in (the Rococo era of so-called "effeminate" high class dandies--a la Percy Blakeney, etc). Lestat is the embodiment of PRIVILEGE: a powerful rich white male vampire, who leans into being foreign/French White to excuse anything he does that people find strange/off/unnatural/dangerous--all the red flags. 🚩🚩🚩

And red flags brings me directly back to matadors/toreros.

@toscrollperchancetomeme

😂 TYSM! Sam Reid dropped so many juicy deets; I couldn't resist! There's so much depth to the Matador outfit, beyond the gendered aspect of bullfighting that I discussed before. Let's go back to what Sam said about Lestat, and delve deeper into matadors:

The most iconic apparel worn by toreros ("bullfighters") / matador de toros ("killer of bulls") in Spanish bullfighting is the Traje de Luces, the "Suit of Lights." The colors are usually bright & vivid, as part of the showmanship & pizzazz. Darker palettes are less common, as shiny sequins (the luces/lights) became part of the standard fit.

However, Lestat's all-black Matador outfit from what Sam called the "villain sequence" in Ep5 seems to be loosely following the style of a different but very closely related outfit, the Traje Campero "Rural/Countryside Suit" aka Traje Corto ("Short Suit").

(These costumes are typically worn during ceremonial parades and a very specific festival I'll get back to in a moment, cuz it's important.) Unlike the Suit of Light's sequins & silk, the Rural Suit is made of suede, leather, or velvet, in dark muted colors. The pants can be light or dark, striped & patterned, with or without chaps (also found in gentleman's uniforms of military officers and cowboys).

The trajes originated from "the flamboyant costumes of the 18th-century dandies and showmen involved in bullfighting, which later became exclusive to the bullfighting ritual." (Wikipedia)

The ancestor of both trajes (luces/campero) is traditional 17th-19th century Andalusian clothing (Andalusia being the home of Spanish bullfighting), closely associated with a very particular type of masculine dandyism. (The campero/corto is also the costume worn by Andalusian male flamenco dancers.)

"Before the 17th century the profession of bullfighting did not exist as such, and the fighters did not wear luxurious & shiny trajes de luces, but instead normal clothes of the time according to the social class to which the bullfighter belonged. The first bullfighter trajes de toreros appeared in the 17th century, when professional bullfighters from Navarre & Andalusia wore characteristic garments with their gangs to participate in performances and thus differentiate themselves from other bullfighter bands." (translated/truncated from Spanish website)

In the mid-1700s, Francisco Romero revolutionized professional bullfighting by establishing the first matadors who fought on foot, heroically fighting the bull face to face with swords & the muleta (iconic red flag) in a dance-like performance, dressed in a suede/velvet coleto (jacket), a precursor to the traje campero. Romero (from a carpenter family) wanted to show off & stand out from the nobility, and changed the game entirely, through a form of social resistance-turned-innovation.

"At that time, bullfighting on horseback was more important, which was considered a sport and not a show. Bullfighting on foot was not yet widely recognized." (translated from Spanish website)

Bull-killing on horseback was practiced by Spanish noblemen, attended by lower class assistants on foot. Romero was the first to make on-foot matadors the stars of what was increasingly becoming a dandified show/performance/dance. Matador Joaquin "Costillares" Rodríguez introduced even more showmanship, competing against Francisco Romero's grandson Pedro Romero (famously painted by Goya--bottom right).

For his matches, Costillares (middle) dressed in flashy silks, threaded in shiny silver braiding; the precursor to modern traje de luces. Like Francisco Romero (left), Costillares wanted to show off & stand out; and revolutionized the male image of the bullfighter through clothes.

In 18th-19th century Andalusian Spain there were 2 types of dandy: the French-imported upperclass petimetre (effeminate dandy), and the indigenous working class majo (masculine/macho dandy).

Noyes, Dorothy. “La Maja Vestida: Dress as Resistance to Enlightenment in Late-18th-Century Madrid.” The Journal of American Folklore 111, no. 440 (1998): 197–217. https://www.jstor.org/stable/541941

The majo, like many dandies, became the peak of Andalusian fashion, across all social classes; and torero/matador outfits weren't the only ones to take cues from them:

18th-19th century majos "distinguished themselves by their elaborate outfits and sense of style in dress and manners, as well as by their cheeky behavior. The majos outfits were exaggerations of traditional Spanish dress. The style stood in strong contrast to the French styles affected by many of the Spanish elite under the influence of the Enlightenment. Majos were known to pick fights with those they saw as afrancesados ("Frenchified" – fops)." (Wikipedia)

The majos' flamboyant/cheeky/saucy/exaggerated behavior was aggressively masculine; a lower/working class resistance to social mores imposed on them by (foreign) elites, whom they saw as more feminine, and FOUGHT against, to reaffirm their masculinity. These dandies were violent, brazen non-conformists; as beautiful & stylish as they were dangerous. And matadors/toreros knew that the bullfight was the perfect arena to exemplify the spirit of the majos through the dandified performance art/sport of killing bulls--a universal cultural symbol of masculine prowess & strength. Spanish bullfighting used to belong solely to the aristocratic equestrian sphere. Lowly pages/assistants like Francisco Romero (dressed in the precursor to the Rural/Countryside Suit), were the first to buck the system by killing bulls on foot--he likely didn't own a horse. The Romeros were from a carpenter family. Costillares was the son of a butcher. But through bullfighting they gained social status and became icons of masculinity--and dandies.

Lestat--the nouveau riche son of a poor country marquis--insists on being all the beautiful things he is without apology: masculine & effeminate alike. But like I said, it was no coincidence that Carol likened Lestat's Ep5 villain outfit with matadors--he's fighting Louis for dominance in their household, and reaffirming his place at the top of their very gendered social hierarchy, as a warning to BOTH "the housewife" AND "the prodigal daughter" he feels are threatening his authority as their Maker, so he defeats them BOTH.

Carol Cutshall initially designed Lestat's matador pants as pajamas--loungewear. (Lestat's CASUAL & comfortable in his ability to KILL--matador means "Killer" in Spanish--and remember what I said about Louis & Claudia being put on the same parallel level in Ep5, when Claudia's attacked by "Killer" aka Bruce.) Sam said Carol made several versions of the pants; and yup, they're foreshadowed in Ep5 when Lestat first starts arguing about Louis' depression, then they pop up again in Ep7 during the Murder Plot--two instances @dwreader brilliantly linked Lestat (& Stanley Kowalski) wearing wifebeaters. (Listen, Carol, I just wanna talk.... 😅🔫)

And here's my last points about Lestat's matador outfit. First there's the irony of Lestat (who grew up poor in rural France) wearing the something very similar to the matador/torero's Rural Suit, traje campero (aka Short Suit (traje corto)). But what's more interesting is that that type of Short/Rural Suit is usually only worn during special festivals called the Tienta ("trials"), not the regular corrida ("bullfights").

These Tienta are trials for young and immature bulls to be tested in the ring, to see if they're fit for breeding/fighting. 🤯 FLEDGLINGS. And who's Lestat's young bull? "Built-like-a-bird" Claudia. Who's the immature bull? The "biggest rat eater of them all," the under-developed "botched" vampire Louis. During these trials, veteran matadors can show off their skills; and novice bullfighters are shown the ropes and prove themselves. Like I said: the matador wins again.

God, even the way Lestat dragged Louis' bloody body out of the courtyard by the jaw/neck resembles the way the defeated bull--bled out & stabbed in the neck--is dragged by the neck out of the ring.

And remember what I said about Lestat and FOOD. Cuz what happens to the bulls after the matadors kill them? They're sent to the slaughterhouse to be butchered for FOOD. People EAT the bulls.

So yeah, my whole point in this post and my first one is not to sleep on guys like Lestat, Percy--or even other famous dandies like Valmont from Dangerous Liasions/Cruel Intentions (mentioned by both @little-desi-historian and @dwreader)--just because they're effeminate--especially when they're emulating mannerisms from a time period where the model of what made a fashionable gentlemen/good breeding/elite society did NOT match modern expectations about gender. People are getting distracted by Lestat's yaasified manner, not what the show itself is signalling through the relationships he has with others.

This show is deliberately painting Lestat as a villain through Louis' & Claudia's perspectives, as they were the ones who suffered under his Reign of Terror. The symbolism behind the matador-inspired costume used in Ep5 reflected gendered social hierarchies embedded within bullfighting culture (in Spain, women only started being allowed to fight in the 19th-20th centuries). Dressed in clothes resembling that of a matador, Lestat beating & defeating Louis mirrored the defeat of the emasculated bull, and the reification of the victor's masculine prowess at the top of the foodchain.