#armand apologist you say????

[duriens]

i know everybody has their opinions on why armand 'couldnt/could prevent it' and it is very interesting to read the various interpretations. the way i see it, there are three possibilities (and i'm for the third, spoiler alert):

one, armand couldnt prevent it because, even as a centuries-old vampire, he genuinely doesn't have the power to stop 13 vampires from eventually coming after him/him+louis if he didn't accept their ultimatum. he can make them faint, he can freeze time, he can sway the mind of the audience (with some difficulty...? true or false?) but how long can he keep these powers up and can he do it forever, for however long vampires' grudges last? he might have thought it was possible for him and louis to run away, but that eventually the coven would've found a way to manage to kill him. there's power in numbers? how powerful are centuries-old vampires, exactly? is the combined power of 13 angry vampires enough? armand himself says at some point 'they might've killed me' or smth along the line, meaning he at least believes them capable of trying to kill him. is he that afraid of confronting the coven, of doing battle with them, of failing and dying? (this is the blandest possibility)

second, armand couldnt prevent it because he didnt want to prevent it. armand is a master manipulator and he likes to manipulate others into destroying the things he's bored of/he's lost control over (the children of darkness, the theatre des vampires... his relationship with louis?) cause he doesn't want to take on the responsibilities that come with that destruction, and the eventual guilt/sorrow. armand is minimizing his role in deceiving louis and claudia and is portraying himself as helpless, a centuries-old vampire with limits to his powers, so much so that even the act of making the audience say one thing over the other takes a toll on him, cause it was so hard to just do that one thing, owwie, of course he saved it to when it came to louis' turn for the sentencing.

this is the armand we think of when we see the memes about his inaction, thinking he's smirking to himself bc he knows he could end it with a snap of his fingers.

now we all know that armand is manipulative and that he likes to be in control even when he cedes control, but is he always and in constant awareness of the degrees of his own manipulation and scheming? is he in control of all that, all the time?? does he do it purposefully, with evil intent, consciously selling out louis and claudia and agreeing to a plan involving lestat to get rid of the coven/santiago and consciously pretending to be weaker than he is to get rid of claudia? so this leads inevitably to

third, armand couldnt prevent it because he convinced himself long ago that he is completely helpless and no word or action of his could ever, ever, change a thing. this state of mind he's fallen into has obvious ties to his past, his slavery, his submissive tendencies, his inability to act and decide for himself. he's created this image of himself of someone weaker and powerless that he fully believes to be true, he manipulates others the same way he manipulates himself. his many expressions of grief, of sorrow, of guilt throughout the episodes are genuine because, at some level, he genuinely believes he 'could not prevent it', because he decided long ago he's the kind of person who simply can't on his own--that can't ever, ever be accused of serious stuff because in this narrative he created for himself he can never be a hundred percent at fault, he doesn't bear all the responsibilities. (he's still a manipulative and controlling individual here, just not as shrewd and consciously cunning as in option 2). in this light, the memes about armand doing nothing when he has the power to act become tragic in their own way, because it's tragic that he truly thinks of himself, a centuries-old vampire leader of the paris coven, as powerless and helpless as he had been when he was still alive.

[atlasblue85]

just copying this mostly verbatim from the dms but I think the difference between armand and louis that I really haven't seen anyone talk about yet is that yes they are both lying and deeply unreliable narrators but

we've seen time and time again with Louis that he believes exactly what he is saying at any given moment, believes it 100%, and only retracts when there's another source disputing it. we see it way at the beginning of the season with Claudia and her being able to dream, we see it in San francisco which admittedly his memories were fucked with there but still, and we see it again this episode with Lestat's version of how Claudia was made. I don't necessarily trust that Lestat's version is true either because Louis will just claim whichever he believes at the time. Even though lestat was lying about so much of what happened and their relationship for whatever reason Louis was willing to take at face value that this other version was correct. Louis WANTS to be telling the truth, the absolute truth, at all times, but unintentionally makes himself a liar by wholeheartedly believing incorrect memories.

whereas Armand, on the other hand, is a fully aware liar. he knows exactly what lies he is telling and when and where, and is deploying them with purposeful reason. A lot of people want to say he is lying all the time but like, the best lies contain the truth and armand knows that better than anyone. I would argue that he is actually the most reliable character because he's not prone to rewriting history to his own benefit the way Louis and lestat are. this next bit is from @doux-amer "does he do it [rewrite history]? yeah, but he's much more meticulous and does it more sparingly or at least does it in smaller doses whereas louis and lestat like to do sweeping changes (they are also super dramatic lmao vs. armand who's much more collected even if he's just as emotionally ruined)" Armand is telling as much truth as possible in order to more convincingly sell the lies when he does tell them.

[nicoleanell]

Still on my kick of meta-ing about IWTV season 2 a few months too late. LOUMAND FIGHT TIME. I gotta be sad about something real quick.

There's definitely a thing in the Armand-apologist side of fandom (the street where I live) where it's often brought up that nothing Armand says in that argument is quite as vile and monstrous as the "groomed me into a little bitch" line. My obligatory disclaimer IN FAIRNESS TO LOUIS: (a) it's certainly not a one-sided fight and they do both get some very ugly hits in, (b) Armand was the sober one (I don't actually think that's much of an excuse but worth pointing out he immediately forgot what happened and apologized even BEFORE any mind-meddling), and (c) holy shit the rest of the episode exists and nothing that preceded Louis' suicide attempt was a justification for the way Armand reacted after it. Cool? Cool.

But still - yeah. That line is gross and extremely Not funny to me. It crosses such a huge line so fast there's almost nothing either of them could say to de-escalate from that. (In fact I'd argue it crosses a line FOR THE AUDIENCE more than it even registers as that bad to Armand, which in itself is kinda sad. Like… his instinct in that moment is laughing and throwing trauma insults back in a stupid Southern accent. He was - I cannot stress this enough - more upset by being called boring.)

I think there's something interesting about the fact that in universe the way Armand responds by mocking Louis' brother's suicide is just as horrible - because Paul's death is meant to be something that was formatively traumatic and life-changing for Louis - but I'm not sure that it fully hits the audience as viscerally terrible on the same level as making fun of Armand being raped by his daddy-vampire and others as. a. child.

But anyway, with the understanding no one came out taking the high road there... the thing that actually kills me about that exchange is we KNOW in that moment, watching them hurl these horrible horrible words at each other: these are things they opened up to each other about in the past. These are things they told each other. They've been together for decades already. This isn't a "digging into your head and pulling stuff out" kind of thing, like some fuckin' Daniel or whatever. This isn't common knowledge of their backstories just because the audience knows it already. They're both acting like "this is a thing you whine about all the time" when they've whined about it to vanishingly few people in the world, actually!!

Armand brings up Paul and Grace because Louis has talked about them, and he listened. Louis has told him about watching Paul step off the roof, about Grace at the cemetary. And Armand told Louis everything about Marius, and Louis filed that away in his brain with some extra words that Armand didn't use. At one point or another, they both unpacked the heaviest shit that ever happened to them and said "have this, I think it's why I am the way I am", they shared these things with each other in moments of intimacy and vulnerability and said "don't hurt me with this, obviously, okay?" And now they're here, unloading it all back onto each other as mockery. Yeah, I've heard you say all that stuff about your damage, and it's fucking pathetic and hilarious actually. It's not just like "I'm trying to hurt you by bringing this up", it's also "you've always sounded ridiculous to me when you talked about this stuff, you know that, right? I pretended to feel bad for you and I truly could not care less."

Like one of the reasons I think that scene is so jaw-dropping is there's so much intimacy and familiarity with each other implied and also shattered by it. And man how DO you ever get back from that. I would start the memory-erasing from that moment forward for sure.

[murfpersonalblog]

I don't have to lie on people, that's why I screencap

Nalyra, as I'd screencapped AND linked in the post about Amel in question, your own anon thanked YOU for being the one who said "Amel possessed Lestat for the drop" in the first place. I didn't have to lie on you when your anon said it themselves.

Big talk saying NOW that blaming Amel would be abuse apologia, when months BEFORE you said you thought Ep5 the fight really was "NOT DOMESTIC ABUSE" at all!

--cuz YOU said multiple times how YOU didn't think Louis & Claudia were abused cuz they didn't act scared enough WTF?

Esp. since YOU go on & on about Amel possessing Lestat--

--when ACCORDING TO BOOK CANON AMEL'S NOT EVEN AWAKE when Loustat were living together, and Lestat said MULTIPLE times that he NEVER heard The Voice or felt compelled/contacted by Amel until YEARS AFTER Akasha was DEAD.

So yeah, you admitted the Drop happened once 2x7 aired, good for frikkin you--after campaigning for MONTHS BEFORE that the S2 revisit was gonna prove once & for all that it DIDN'T happen--you & your followers analyzing everything from Lestat's hairstyles to prove that Louis was "wrong" or Armand had inserted "fake" memories of the Drop or whatever it took to declare Lestat innocent--

You walking all your theories back NOW, AFTER the S2 revisit, doesn't negate the fact that it was YOUR theories (even BEFORE Sam's interview) that opened the can of worms in the first place on people thinking the Drop wasn't even real, let alone Amel's fault--all in an effort to point the finger at someone or something OTHER than Monsieur Lestat de Lioncourt HIMSELF for Ep5!

And I ALSO pointed out how in the same breath of walking back the Amel blame you STILL accused Louis of starting the fight, like wtf? It's STILL finding ways to absolve Lestat of responsibility, by victim blaming a father for protecting his daughter from being attacked--when even SAM said "it's not worth" wondering what would've happened if Louis had just backed down. Cuz that's ABUSE APOLOGIA & victim blaming and it makes you look weird as hell!

Anyone who thinks a parent protecting his own child from having her neck snapped is the one who "kindles" a fight is severely screwed in the head!

First you say Amel's possessing Les, then you walk it back and double down on saying Louis kindled/started the fight cuz he had the NERVE, the unmitigated GALL to throw himself at Lestat while his own kid was being choked TF out in front of him. But I'M lying on you for for calling out how you pivot every time one of your wack theories is proven WRONG?

And I DO know what Sam said--cuz I posted the whole transcription--which is that the Akasha bit was REMOVED from the S1 script, cuz spirit possession is effing irrelevant in a story about *gasp* DOMESTIC ABUSE, and that if AMC decides to use it to absolve/excuse Lestat in later seasons it'll be blasted for precisely what it is: ABUSE APOLOGIA to handwave that what Les did to Lou wasn't his fault. ANY entertainment of a theory like that is an IMMEDIATE red flag about why one would be so gung-ho to make the Drop less awful than it really was--and THAT is why I take issue with you & your anons who subscribe(d) to it, past, present or future.

But there y'all go, always acting persecuted and saying YOU'RE pissed, when all you're doing is ENCOURAGING & CREATING the bad takes in the fandom that have people constantly saying that someone who got abused by their S.O. is the one who should be to blamed!

Oh, so you understand what endorsement means wrt not being perceived as an abuse apologist--but you suddenly have a seizure when the racially coded language you historically & particularly love using wrt to Bipoc fans is called on the carpet (a la "them" "those people" "that subset" "that side of the fandom," etc), huh?

Your thinly veiled effing racist rhetoric ain't slick; you've been talking that way about Bipocs for ages now, like people don't know who the heck #Them is, when you and your fellows bigots throw shade at anyone who dares to look at Lestat with a critical eye & speak openly about the racial optics of a Black man getting his arse beat by a white man y'all are so quick to say is innocent & the Black man's either crazy or lying or both.

Cuz YES, Ep5 has created a domino effect in the fandom that's NOT gonna stfu & go away; and just cuz popular consensus says the sky is purple doesn't mean other people don't have eyes and can't see for themselves what the heck is going on around them.

Rolin wanted to start a dialogue about power dynamics, abuse, and yes darlings, even race, and here it is--stay mad.

Sweetie, I don't even have you blocked. I don't need to use a burner account when I can just type interview with the vampire or iwtv in the search bar on the dashboard and your posts are up & down the dang screen along with everyone else's. Learn how Tumblr works before you try that on me again.

[amadeoapologist]

i also think armand fundamentally does not know how to make people happy because he himself is unhappy. i was talking with my friend about louis and how louis still uses human markers of wealth and success that lestat and claudia and armand don't understand. louis wants to own things, he wants to invest in profitable endeavors. i don't think he wants to laze about in his wealth, but he wants to work hard and have it pay off and he wants to see the tangible products of his efforts.

and i'm bringing this up in relation to armand because i think this mindset explains some of the disconnect in dubai, beyond just the circumstances with lestat that got them there. because louis feels lobotomized to me in his cold modern penthouse where he's disconnected from his food, he's disconnected from other vampires, he doesn't work. he buys and sells artwork he appears to have only a passing interest in, he's tempered his accent. he sleeps in a bed and not a coffin, he eats at the table.

and i've been trying to wrap my head around that and how he ended up there, but i'm starting to think a lot of that is armand trying to give louis what he thinks louis wants to feel satiated. louis wants independence and nice things and obvious markers of wealth. so. have this penthouse with the most coldly, impersonally stylish decor. acquire this expensive artwork and then sell it so you can buy something more expensive. if you won't hunt, then here--dine on fine china.

i'm not saying armand holds all the money or anything, we don't know their finances. but i could see him continuously providing louis with expensive things in the hopes that will satisfy louis' desire to feel successful (and also because he has a metric fuckton to make up for and this is one way he tries), but it doesn't because what is louis doing to earn it? money makes money and it seems like louis doesn't have to do anything any more but coast, which is, as armand fears, boring. but idk if he knows how to address that because armand doesn't understand louis' perspective in the first place.

i think i love and empathize with armand so much because he's the one character on the show who feels, at his core, like he isn't good enough. i don't think this is as much a struggle for louis or lestat or claudia, but i think it is for armand. armand is pathetic. he's morally void, and he's too damn weak to grow a fucking backbone and stand by his choices without couching them in lies, because he can't accept being perceived as someone who would make those decisions. he wants affection. he craves approval.

(lmao old school a/n here--i wrote most of this before the finale and damn......i was spot on re: armand couching choices in lies lolololol)

people keep making posts about how armand seems a bit too invested in daniel's opinion of him. and obviously there's an armandiel bent to those, but i also think it's because daniel is the most objective person in the room. he isn't objective because he's tangled up in their story, too, but he's outside of the partnership. he's a journalist. he's an archivist of some version of the truth. and i think he wants daniel to see him how he wants to be seen. he didn't want daniel to think he was boring in san francisco, and he doesn't want daniel to think he's boring now decades later. he wants the external validation from someone outside of his unit to tell him he did the best he could. which obviously daniel won't do, which makes armand want it more.

there's a very good chance i'm completely wrong and talking out my ass and just a pathetic armand apologist myself, but idk. every episode makes me more curious about him. i started season 2 really disinterested in armand and lowkey put off by his presence. but the season has shifted things for me slowly but surely, and now i think armand is one of the most interesting characters on the show. and that makes me love him even more.

[aryastark-valarmorghulis]

Two reasons why I'm having a hard time connecting with the Iwtv / VC fandom and I went into a major blocking/unfollowing spree 🤦🏻‍♀️

1. Hardcore Lestat stans-apologists (psa: I'm not a Lestat hater by all means, I like and enjoy book Lestat, I love Samstat and Loustat) rejoycing because Lestat will finally be the lead and we'll discover he's this special snowlflake of a tortured hero and the narrative did him dirty so far, he isn’t a villain, he's a poor victim and the abuse towards Louis was a mutual abuse etc etc

Some stuff, I admit, is actually a lot more nuanced than this and not completely wrong per se, but it's worded in a way that makes me realise some Lestat fans don't care about Louis at all and want the show to be only about Lestat and his white manpain. Which. Um, ok, I know it's exactly like this in the books but they're not doing the books page by page (and thank heaven otherwise we'd have Blood Canticle on screen). It would be a terrible decision to sideline the black main character in favour of the white special prince etc etc not to mention nonsensical since the show has been color-conscious in its approach and very much interested in exploring racism, black queer characters and identity so far

2. VC book purists that despise the show have been enraged about many things during the last 3 years but the worst were: Armand not being a 17 y.o. redhead and Daniel being old. They're now saying this horrible show gaslighted us (seriously?) into believing DM would happen and this "thing" isn’t the real DM. You know, the one where Armand looks like a kid and Daniel is a hot 30 y.o.

Which. Again, yes, it's in the books and I love book DM (best thing AR ever wrote imho), but they're adapting the books and a lot of those scathing complaints sounds a lot like racism & ageism to me

Sorry. I'm done, got it off my chest, now I'm free 🤷🏻‍♀️

[oddstone]

I have SO MICH to say to scream about iwtv that I actually will lose my momentum to do any of my remaining work for the semester. SO all I will say is that I was VERY HAPPY to see one of my favs Ben Daniel’s on the show truly put the ICK in Francis/ Santiago. I will be disparage that character to DUST. but I’m just a Ben girly. Anyway….. y’all are so lucky I don’t do fandom shit anymore. But Lestat apologists… EVERYTHING U TOUCH GON TURN TO ASH HOE! Armand… u sad as bitch… u try hard blubber fish. Assad truly my beautiful brown prince roses for u for bringing complicated yet bitch ass pussy footing neurotic anxiety ridden. cowardice back to the screen.

LOUIS DE POINTE DU LAC. The way I wanted to slap this character out of existence… the way the chancla was FORMING IN MY HAND AT THE END OF rp. 8. And no I haven’t read the books so let me get this off my chest. to give him some room I GET that this possibly a scene of closure that he needed to be is truly done with Lestat. I get having moments of emotional closure with a person you loved despite their abuse. I can put my nuance hat on. And I GET IT, trying to be there for an ex at their lowest point even if it’s not a sound choice, I GET IT.

But YOU KNOW THE TRUTH. And that still shouldn’t change the fact that YOU GIVING LESTAT AN INCH IS GIVING HIM 8 THOUSAND MILES. . And s3 will probably clear up this scene and we’re getting Lestat pov. But it can’t be denied that initial feeing of that end scene MEANS U LEARNED NOTHING AT ALL. If u get back with this white devil.

I literally don’t give a fuck if Louis recollection is skewed, that literally is what happens when you spend a life with a toxic abusive controlling narcissistic partner. And u happen to be co-dependent. Like it makes sense that Louis memories aren’t all the way there, even when it makes him look favourable. Outside the supernatural aspect that is a response the brain does when recollecting trauma.

Anyway, I feel this way because literally everything Claudia has told him has plead with him meant NOTHING. And yeah yeah I know there is that angle of analysis that, that is the point and how Louis himself is toxic.

But some of y’all act as if it makes it okay ! And I swear in s3 if I hear/see shit about mutual abuse I will literally duplex u into a volcano.

My baby Claudia. Saying that you deserved more is an understatement and seemingly the wrong statement. You didn’t just deserve more u deserved everything. I made peace when it came to me analytically and allegorically that u are literally the inner child which we all stifle that we all push away. Claudia was truly the agony of unfulfilled potential. And she deserved to be loved. And she was loved and that is all I can ask for.

Man I was in SHAMBLES.

Anyway lol can’t wait for s3,

[danlous]

people on the reddit sub for iwtv are a special kind of breed. there is such an interesting discussion to be had about louis' abuse and neglect toward claudia, but no. that's not what these people mean. that whole sub is a cesspool of "lestat is so cute and innocent and is actually the one suffering abuse". anne rice lives on in that sub and those fans and i hate that that's the part of fandom the show caters to with promo and early screen invites. (there were threads on there wanting to see assad get lynched ffs. the post dressed at up as armand but used assad's name and in the comments they straight up said people like assad should not be on this show and need to be removed. that thread was up for a long time, but the second you mention racism in the fandom, the thread gets locked within a minute)

It definitely has some of the most stupid, racist and abuse apologist shit i've seen in fandom. Another recent example that made me baffled how can anyone can willingly say something like in public was one user making a post how Claudia hating that she doesn't age doesn't make any sense since she should be happy that she'll always be a 'sexy teen'. At least with that post other users were calling it out for being gross and weird but many other shitty posts and comments get upvoted like that 'louis is abusive to lestat and armand' one earlier. There are 37k members in that sub so there are lots of different users of course but i def feel it has proportionally more white book fans compared to other sites, and also people lacking basic knowledge of things like dynamics of abuse and racism that are pretty essential for understanding the show

[appendectomy]

i have this very very specific vision of show marius in my head, which i may adjust as i continue to read the books. and i am trying to temper my expectations so im not dissapointed when the writers inevitably can't read my mind lol. but basically

i want marius to be a middle aged white guy. i want him to be charming, handsome, generous. i want him to have moments of genuine tenderness with armand. i want the audience to be lulled into a false sense of security with him, just like armand was. i want the audience to understand why armand feels such attachment to him, and the safety he thought he had found in marius. and i specifically want him to be cast as a white guy because i think that dynamic would specifically inform a lot of show armand's current identity issues especially in regards to his ethnic identity (or lack thereof). but at the same time, i want the show to be unapologetic in their depiction and damnation of his abuse. i want his charisma AND his abuse to exist hand in hand. i know inevitably this will breed marius apologists but i think this would be such a good opportunity to continue the abuse commentary and racial commentary the show has already engaged in regardless. if the show does it right, most people won't think that way and will instead come away questioning their own biases.

i think because of the show's explicit pivot of armand from a very young white boy to a young indian man, an avenue has opened up which explicitly allows for marius' abuse to become an allegory for European colonial violence. like it would already serve as a commentary on interpersonal abuse anyway, but engaging with the racial dynamic could add another interesting layer to it all. this would help explore armand as a character too. i understand that in the books, anne rice kind of portrayed marius as this tortured, largely sympathetic character who was emblematic of white Roman society, something anne rice saw as romantic and noble. and so i think by engaging with orientalist theory when writing armand and marius' dynamic the writers could easily interrogate this textual depiction of whiteness, which is something they've already shown they're interested in doing with seasons 1 and 2. by leaning in to and not apologising for his abusiveness they could esentially say yeah anne rice thought this was ok but WE DON'T! she excused his abuse by making him 'likeable' but we're going to show you that's not how it works!

i think by making marius appear both charming AND abusive, not only are you deconstructing stereotypical depictions of abusers as one-dimensional cartoon villains, but you're also creating an allegory out of the interpersonal abuse between marius and armand; marius genuinely thinks he is good for armand, saving armand, and other people think that too because he comes across likeable, just like those who enact orientalist colonial violence believe they are acting in the best interests of those they are colonising due to the delusion of a 'civilising mission.' i think this cognitive dissonance being written into marius on the show could easily symbolise the cognitive dissonance that is at the heart of a lot of orientalist fantasy.

i think characterising marius as someone who engages with orientalist fantasy, someone who views himself as a saviour, a civiliser, an appreciator of asian cultures, while he enacts such horrific violence on armand also already fits quite well with what we already know of show armand's backstory. he was 'rescued' by marius from a brothel and abused by him while still a child. he believed marius to be his merciful saviour, even hundreds of years later. he has a severe disconnect from his ethnic identity, doesnt even remember for sure if the name he had as a child was the name his indian parents gave him. this not only paints the picture of a complex abuse victim, but also could be used to symbolise the wider material and psychologically consequences of colonial violence on a person.

I'm gonna need the entire iwtv writers room to read orientalism by edward said before they start writing armand and marius' show dynamic Tbh

[licncourt]

What's your opinion on the iwtv movie?

I really like the 1994 movie! It's visually stunning, absolutely immaculate costume and set design and quite faithful to the book aside from a few changes that makes sense for the sake of the transition from book to film. The practical effects are so much fun and even the CGI is very well-applied.

It's not a perfect movie, there are some cut scenes I think should've stayed from the book and from the original script, plus the fact that it's pretty clear the story has been a bit straightwashed with things like giving Louis a dead wife and child instead of a brother and cutting the Only One Coffin scene. It was the 90s though, and it's honestly very impressive how much they managed to get onscreen, so props for that. It can't have been easy to get even what they did into a big Hollywood movie with A-list actors.

As far as standout elements, the casting of Kirsten Dunst in particular was absolutely perfect, she's incredible as Claudia, truly the standout performance in my opinion. Tom Cruise was fantastic too and that's still wild almost thirty years later. I hate to give the scientologist credit, but he did his homework and really put his whole pussy into playing Lestat. He deserves the praise he gets for sure.

Brad Pitt...okay listen. I am a Brad Pitt Louis apologist. I think if you look at his performance as a reflection of Louis' dissociation and apathy during that time in his life, it reads quite well. I just wish there were more emotional peaks and valleys, even just a few, to offset and highlight that monotone approach and make it feel like a character choice rather than BP sulking (which is what it was). However, anyone who's followed me for any length of time knows how I feel about the sewer scene. That was the serve of the century and I was so glad Jacob Anderson resurrected that expression in the show. That's a little baby your honor.

My main gripe with the movie is how flattened Louis' character was. He's presented as a direct opposite to Lestat, the stick in the mud who simply objects to feeding on humans because it's wrong to kill, no more and no less. I really missed the hypocrisy and contradiction that makes Louis LOUIS. We only get it in the (brilliant) prostitute scene and that's a shame.

I also wish they would've kept Louis' religious trauma as a focal point of the story rather than a single mention with Armand. It's so integral to his character that its absence is really noticeable. Still, I understand that it's a movie and there's only so much depth you can include. I think it could've been done a bit better in that regard though.

The highest praise I can give the movie is that they actually added a few things I wish were in the book:

Louis eating some lady's poodles

GRAPE THROWING

Lestat's retort where he yells "why should I know these things? Do you know them?" I think it really hits at the heart of Lestat's pain regarding his turning and provides a great moment of vulnerability

Claudia's line "why do you say such things?" It doesn't fully change the scene, but it drives home the father-daughter relationship in a really poignant way.

Generally speaking, I think it's a great, if inevitably imperfect, movie and definitely one of my favorites. I always use it as an entry point to get people to read the book and it's never failed me.

[emtmercy]

the ep 5 loustat scenes didnt bother me much and i never thought roland jones was aiming for an earth style human abusive relationship although i get why people were concerned about that. fiction just does work with different rules than real life because characters can act in ways that are inconsistent with real life implications especially once everyones a serial killer vampire

i really felt that based on everything in the show and his quote of "this is the interview [holds up book one] and this is the show [holds up the entire VC series]" that they were attempting to achieve and expand on the experience of reading the series where book one has you being like wow lestat is the devil and then the rest of the books written years later during anne rice's lestat stan period the canon is changed to reveal that lestat is still an evil crazy vampire but not on the irredeemable one note villain level that louis wants to portray for his own emotional security + to achieve whatever he feels he needs to with daniel

but i didnt expect to have them drop the hammer with the reveal so hard in the finale it was so good

roland jones saying this version of events has likely been fed to him by armand asdkjasdklasdjkasd

obviously totally understandable to be upset with ep 5 regardless because even though they were trying to just do a Fucked Up Vampires Being Fucked Up (as told through the warped lens of a man telling a story with an agenda) it is definitely questionable to do that POV game with violence between partners because of the way the real world we exist in is

this post is so long but great episode and great win for lestat apologist sam reid

sad they didnt get to dump him in the swamp but you gotta do what you gotta do lmao

[hekateinhell]

Marius: cheaped out on paint when he was commissioned to do a very expensive portrait and it SHOWED.

VC characters, but they get cancelled for random reasons:

Lestat: Killed 8 (eight) endangered animals and wore them in a cape

Louis: He kicked a dog once. Also killed several animals. 

Mojo: #1 Lestat apologist.

Feel free to add more.

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV 2022 - My Top 10 Reactors (2024)

Disclosure: I'm a diehard Louis-stan & Claudia's self-appointed pro bono lawyer. I'm also Loustat OTP shipper, who loves giving Lestat a hard time, cuz he deserves it.

FrankFreezy (S1 & S2 complete)

Olurinatti Pop! (S1 & S2 complete)

What R U Doing Bree (S1 & S2 complete)

AvatarAdrian (S1 & S2 complete)

ShalayahHomebody TV (up to 2x6 as of Dec 2024)

PettyPumpkins (S1 & S2 complete)

Syntell (S1 & S2 complete)

Bird Calls (S1 & S2 complete)

FoxTaco (S1 & S2 complete)

Nikki and Amber TV (S1 & S2 complete)

#1: FrankFreezy (S1 & S2 complete)

My vibe check always looks at how reactors respond to Lestat (S1) & Armand (S2), vs Louis & Claudia. I deeply appreciate how Frank's videos are even longer than the eps themselves, cuz he actually takes time to THINK. He won my heart when he said he identifies with Louis the most (he even painted a beautifully sensitive portrait of LDPDL), cuz he'd seen abusive relationships IRL, and was able to recognize certain power imbalances & toxic behavior cuz of his personal experiences. He can equally defend Louis & Claudia, AND rightly call them out when they act out of pocket (esp. Louis); not from a place of hatred or racism or ageism or bad faith gotchas, but cuz he KNOWS. He likes Louis' moments of self reflection, cuz he himself has been hated by people he's mistreated in the past, too. Frank's introspective response to S2 (esp. 2x8) was the purest, rawest response I've ever seen from a reactor. You HAVE to rewatch this show, and PAY ATTENTION to the deeper meanings & messages & lessons. NO, Lou & Claud are not angels, they do problematic effed up things. But the show's not about crucifying them (a la the Trial); it's about exploring how trauma & abuse affects people, and affects relationship/family dynamics in complex & messy ways. Frank just has such emotionally mature takes, it's really refreshing, when so many reactors are surface-deep.

#2: Olurinatti Pop! (S1 & S2 complete)

My QUEEN. A criminal defense lawyer IRL, Olay takes not a drop of BS from Louis, his garbage family, Armand, and ESPECIALLY not from Lestat. Despite being the embodiment of Claudia's rage, Olay's HILARIOUS as she chews these ridiculous characters new arseholes, visibly trying to not strangle them through the frikkin screen. XD I fell in love with Olay when she swiftly pointed out the gendered/racial/power imbalances between Louis & everyone he interacts with as a closeted Black gay man during Jim Crow; and how Lestat's toxic AF color blindness inevitably led to gaslighting, manipulation, and abuse. I love Loustat, but I also appreciate having someone who can yank my rose-tinted glasses off & point out their flaws; urging us to be more critical of the BS being slung in our faces. Lestat Apologists vacate the premises immediately, cuz Olay is NOT playing with y'all.

#3: What R U Doing Bree (S1 & S2 complete)

Another Black female criminal justice/defense lawyer IRL (I have a type), Bree's a longtime Tumblrina with a very analytical way of processing the characters and episodes, that is equal parts smart and equal parts unhinged fangirl. She's a Daniel Molloy stan (complete with a lifesized cardboard cutout of Eric Bogosian, omfg, LOL), and lives for him calling out all the inconsistencies in Loumand's accounts. She also gives flowers to the other characters, meticulously allotting Brownie Points every time they do/say something she likes--which makes it fun to watch her and start knowing ahead of time what she'll give BPs to. Daniel & Claudia get the most flowers, and she enjoys Louis, which is crucial for me as a Loustan. Lestat had to grow on her after a few rewatches, and she now fondly calls him her "dumb son," LOL.

#4: AvatarAdrian (S1 & S2 complete)

I LOVE having a Black gay man's reactions to this show, omg. Adrian's recaps are so dang FUNNY--he lives for ALL the mess. Most importantly, he stays ready to clock Lestat and his busted "George Washington" colonizer behavior, and I'm here for it! Adrian's Team Loumand, so I can't, but I get it, cuz Lestat.

#5: ShalayahHomebody TV (up to 2x6 as of 11/20/24)

My original favorite IWTV reactor, Shalayah just calls ish out like she sees it. I love myself a good ranter who can just go AWF on fools (esp. Lestat), no holds barred. IRL/technical stuff slowed Shalayah down a lot, and she hasn't finished S2 yet, so I ended up lowering her on my list, but Shalaya's so freaking awesome awesome--funny & here for all the tea and mess. She even made watching Mayfair Witches fun, as she dragged everyone for filth.

#6: PettyPumpkins (S1 & S2 complete)

I've learned to avoid white reactors in this fandom, cuz too many of them are either complaining book purists or just blatant racists. But Petty Pumpkins are absolute darlings. They are funny and love mess & drama, but are also so sensitive & sweet; when they cry I cry. They absolutely love Claudia, and immediately clocked Armand as the snake he is--Armand Apologists beware, cuz they WILL call y'all out during their reactions.

#7: Syntell (S1 & S2 complete)

Two HBCU educated articulate Black reactors who know about the history of the Black experience in America, they immediately & authentically & candidly talk to the racial things Louis experiences in a way VERY FEW reactors ever do in this out-of-touch fandom--THAT PART! Their videos are longer cuz they talk more, with a dedicated commentary/discussion section after each ep. I like Syntell (the man--an Armand stan) way more than M.Claire (the lady--a Lestan, who hated the S3 promo). Syntell pays attention WAY more, and catches on to themes & messages & layers quicker, and his takes are so good. But they bounce well off of each other. Neither of them cared for S1 Claudia much, but M.Claire really didn't like her.

#8: Bird Calls (S1 & S2 complete)

These ladies are fun to watch--a bit lighter on the commentary, but heavy on the micro/macro-expressions. They were NOT here for Loustat, but the difference with their take on 1x5/1x6 that put them above FoxTaco for me is that they're here for CLAUDIA and her liberation, rather than being sour cuz it wasn't fun watching abused!Louis rather than BAMF!Lestat. I esp. like Resha (afro); she has that quick snazzy personality that I just really vibe with, as she catches things hella fast & has zero time for BS--she instantly clocked Armand as a p.o.s. in 1x7 and I was ROLLING. She talks more than Akaya (beanie), and mostly everything she says is exactly what I was thinking.

#9: FoxTaco (S1 & S2 complete)

TBH Taco makes me mad sometimes, cuz S1 was Louis' story, and in 1x6 he was way too callous & insensitive when he outright said he didn't care about seeing Louis' depression, like...? Wrong show, my guy. 😅 But when he's tuned in, he's on point a lot of the time, which makes his rich commentary valuable & insightful, even when I don't agree with his takes. I know I'll enjoy him more in S3, when his attitude as a Lestan fits better with a show focusing on Lestat's experiences & personality rather than Louis'.

#10: Nikki and Amber TV (S1 & S2 complete)

Entertaining and engaging, but it frustrates me sometimes when they miss things, but not bother to rewind and go back to better understand what they're watching. I get wanting to do blind 1st time watches/reactions, the show must go on, but I wish they spent more time afterwards/during on reviewing with commentary; cuz when they do talk more they have such good points to make, and I love hearing their perspectives as two parents.

[sofipitch]

You know it’s bad when the audience is hoping for Rashid (Armand?) to French kiss Louis in front of Lestat and proceed to rip Lestat’s head off. Yeah, he kills Claudia ;_; but at least he doesn’t horrifically beat Louis to a pulp? (I mean there’s still time so who knows ☹️) See! We’re down for our fucked up little characters but there’s a line when fantasy becomes eerily too similar to real life horror.

Yeah I think you summarized it perfectly with that last sentence. There is a difference between horror horror of being like tortured by Pinhead that can serve as a metaphor versus like just straight up seeing something happen and wonder if the writers are abuse apologists or having to block tons of VC fans for being abuse apologists. Bc that's what has come out of episode 5, whereas if someone says that they like Michael Meyers it doesn't activate my fight of flight response the same way

[rueroyale]

Marius/Armand

Imagine:

I’m a pre-teen, 20+ years ago, having borrowed Blood and Gold from the library and my immigrant parents completely ignorant of what I was reading, and I myself not understanding that I was reading basically softcore erotica.

I really liked Blood and Gold.  I was just beginning to get into Classics at the time and all the Roman and Byzantine stuff really just stoked the infant classicist in me.

So my impression of Marius was, from an early time, very positive.

Ever since I was a kid though, I was just confused by Armand.  Am I supposed to like this character?  I mean lots of people are Armand-apologists because he’s got trauma, but in my opinion no amount of trauma can justify (a) killing everyone in your Satanist coven just because you’re no longer their leader, or (b) trying to kill the hero multiple times, including when he’s at his weakest, or (c) pretending to care about Louis when you’re just afraid of dying alone (and killing Claudia in order to get him!).

But I digress...

The point is now that I ship Marius/Armand.  As much as their relationship is idealized, romanticized, and fantastical, it is also just so nostalgic and comforting.  The idea of a lost Eden pops up all over the Vampire Chronicles - Lestat in Paris as a mortal, the Rue Royale years, even in the new generation of novels with the Atlanteans.  In the “modern era”, for Lestat at least, that lost paradise has been regained, in some form.

What hasn’t been restored is Marius and Armand’s paradise in Venice.  Maybe Armand is right that Marius no longer feels the fiery passion that gave us, the readers, two different perspectives of that scene where he jerks off Armand for the first time (did we really need to see that, Anne?).  And Armand ... well, that guy is broken.  I can buy the religious redemption, but even religious redemption can’t undo a fundamentally distrustful and nihilistic disposition.

What I want to see - wildly idealistic, I know - is for these two characters to restore each other to optimism, to quicken themselves and each other with a zest for life.

Considering their relationship was the most explicitly romantic in the VC, why should this, of all relationships, be forever lost?  Let it not be so.

"Master, I love you, but now I must be alone," I said. "You don't need me now, do you, Sir? How can you? You never really did." Instantly I regretted it. The words, not the tone, were impudent. And our minds being so divided by intimate blood, I was afraid he'd misunderstand.

"Cherub, I want you," he said forgivingly. "But I can wait. Seems not long ago I spoke these same words when we were together, and so I say them again."

UGH JUST KISS.

[corruptmalice]

Thank you @spiced-wine-fic​ for asking me these same questions! I really enjoyed reading your answers!!

A - Ships that you currently like a lot. (They don’t have to be OTPs because not everyone has OTPs.) Friendships, pairings, threesomes, etc. are allowed.

@spiced-wine-fic​, I actually agree with the Angbang opinion. Though I’m an adamant shipper of the pairing. It’s highly twisted, but most of my favorite ships are and that’s the sick draw haha. A few of my favorite otps from different fandoms for instance:

Melkor/Mairon (Silm)

Annatar/Celebrimbor (Silm)

Maedhros/Fingon (Silm)

Feanor/Fingolfin (Silm)

Beleg/Túrin (Silm)

Erestor/Glorfindel (Silm) is about the most tame lmao

Armand/Daniel (VC Chronicles)

Hisoka/Illumi (HunterxHunter)

C - A ship you have never liked and probably never will.

I can’t say I dislike any pairings. There’s just some I have very little to no interest in reading. Not a big fan of crossover pairings. Nothing worth mentioning lol There’s some very problematic pairings in the HxH fandom I’m not even gonna mention because we all know what they are. Not even I would touch that with a ten foot pole and no one else should. 

N - Name three things you wish you saw more or in your main fandom (or a fandom of choice).

In the lotr/silm fandom I wish Beleg/Túrin had much more content! I mean it’s out there but I’ve read and seen everything out there and I need more haha A bit more Feanor/Fingolfin would be nice as well, but that’s just me. It’s controversial, just the way I like it. 

T - Do you have any hard and fast headcanons that you will die defending? 

Melkor did no wrong! Haha I kid, but my headcanon is that he was a creator with imposing checked powers. Why give him the urge and ability and then suppress it? Of course that’s going to set someone off the rails. Not an apologist. My dude was dark to his core and was wildin’ most of the time. But his story is so biblical.  A typical fallen angel. The parallels are highly amusing and that sort of thing just rubs me the right way haha