#don't listen to rolin

[smalldicksantiago]

me when people seriously think that armand turned daniel out of spite:

[dreadfuldevotee]

I'd like to discuss the elephant in the room. Why did we get zero Loumand sex scenes? We got hints and implications, but season 1 was pretty explicit. Do we think that that's a creative choice or something else is happening?

I'm glad I ended up ruminating on this for about a week because episode 7 & 8 really solidified my opinion on it.

I do wanna start by saying that it's very clear to me that there was supposed to be more explicit scenes between them. There has been some thoughts tossed around that censorship happened with the 9 pm timeslot (as opposed to the 10 pm timeslot of S1). I believed this hearing Assad and Jacob talk about the BDSM dynamic between Louis and Armand, but what really sold me on this was Production Designer Mara LePere-Schloop talking about the bedroom set and more specifically about their beautifully carved custom headboard. (If you're a production nerd like me or just want to know more about the design philosophy of IWTV I recommend giving the entire thing a listen!).

I think there are several reasons I think as to why they decided to leave any more explicit scenes on the cutting room floor but above them all is: you cannot separate Armand's sexuality from his abuse. I am really against pulling a "well if you read the books" card but reading just the first couple chapters of "The Vampire Armand" makes me understand so much about not only Armand as a character, but the care being taken to his adaptation. It's clear to me that alongside Rolin & Co.'s commitment to not watering him down to a one-dimensional villain they are also trying to not fall into Anne Rice's tendency to romanticize his trauma.

Sex and sexuality is not the same pillar of Louis and Armand's relationship it was in Louis and Lestat's and so I don't believe their story suffers from the lack of on-screen sex. But I also firmly believe that maybe we don't need to be slutting out the character who we literally just watched talk about how he doesn't remember his life before being sex trafficked. And even when he was "freed" he was still being repeatedly assaulted at the hands of, and under the eye Marius de Romanus. Like it is extremely important to remember that Armand's craving for dominion in his relationships is a manifestation of trauma that deserves the same level of care and depth given to every other trauma portrayed in this show.

I think people have gotten too comfortable calling IWTV a romance when it has always been Gothic Horror. Romance and sex are pivotal to the story but I have found the demands for sex scenes this season a bit absurd and also? unfounded? Loustat share more kisses on screen but there are two sex scenes and both are very plot relevant. I truly figured we were all in agreement that the eroticism of this show is found in the various displays of power, and the dynamics it creates and not the actual clapping of ass-cheeks...which also wasn't happening in S1 either. S2 does not suffer because of the lack of sex-scenes, but the likelihood if it suffering trying to make one work is

[nalyra-dreaming]

Odd, but suddenly today on twitter I'm seeing mentions of a rumor that iwtv was nearly canceled during season 2, and that the netflix deal saved it, and possibly also the ratings bump after ep 5 (the theory being that people didn't like the Loumand romantic relationship, so they started watching more once it became clear Armand was a villain?). I don't know where this is coming from, and it seems weird that it would only come up now, so I just wanted to ask about it? Because it seemed like as s2 was airing, you had heard some insider-ish info that the s3 renewal was happening long before it was publicly announced--and plus, while the netflix deal is a good thing, I'm not sure why that would make the difference between canceling and renewing a show that's part of a larger universe they're so invested in? So I don't know if this ~rumor is just retrospective anxiety morphing through a game of whispers?

Yes, season 3 was renewed months and months before season 2 even aired.

That I know.

I also know that there are individuals in this fandom who strive on sowing distrust and fear, and these cancellation rumors come up again and again and again.

Just... don't listen to them.

AMC paid big, big bucks for the rights to the books. BIG bucks. They own the right in perpetuity.

The only way they can have ROI is by producing - that is why they are building this "Immortal Universe".

Before the show even started it was said that Sam Reid had been signed for 5 seasons, too.

Rolin Jones signed a multi-year contract with AMC in May... and he is only doing IWTV.

AMC is not the biggest network. They do not have the biggest pull. But they make quality content, and all things considered we can be very happy they did, indeed, buy the books.

And they have stated before how happy they are with the show.

[toscrollperchancetomeme]

I'm currently listening to "The Dirt" by Motley Crue as an audiobook, because Rolin Jones mentioned it as part of his reading list for Season 3 of Interview with the Vampire. I actually did see the movie a few years ago and enjoyed it, and I love artist biographies, but nothing could have prepared me for how graphic and horrible some of this stuff is, not to mention how they treated their groupies and girlfriends (all the content warnings for sexual assault and a lot of misogyny). (But I truly appreciate that they don't seem to gloss over anything and managed to grow into somewhat better people. It's also giving me a lot of thoughts about today's cancel culture, etc.)

Anyway, I'm usually a binge reader, but I really have to microdose this. If this is even vaguely where they are going with Lestat's tour… damn. We are NOT prepared. There will be SO MANY DRUGS, escapades and self-destructive behavior. There also are some really interesting parallels between Nikki Sixx' and Lestat's childhood traumas and Tommy Lee's and Lestat's very adhd-coded behaviour. Plus the time they spent squatting in LA, trying to get the band started and successful… very much Lestat in Paris! So yes, I can definitely imagine where RJ is going with this and I'm really here for it. <3

Also, Sharon Osbourne just showed up and I love how this Young British Woman successfully manages to reign in the absolute chaos of These Boys through sheer strength of personality. (You really really need a groupie? Well you better beg me on your knees and I will stand by your side while you pick one (1) that I pre-approve so you don't catch a disease.) True queen behaviour.

[vaperarmand]

Listen. Listen. It pains me to think that Daniel was turned out of spite and abandoned right after. So I'm putting on my clown wig and I'm not taking it off until s3 comes out.

In all of s1 and s2 I haven't seen Armand being actually angry or cruel with 2022 Daniel. Hurt, annoyed - yes, but not spiteful or cruel. Many of his looks are so obviously tender that it almost hurts to watch. We haven't seen the scripts for other episodes so i don't know whether that's just Assad fighting for his life or Rolin and other writers planned it this way. At the very least Rolin definitely allowed it.

What i do know is that the original script for 2×08 said Armand was angry. I also remember Assad saying in an interview that it was a bit difficult for him to act surprised in that scene. Not angry. And in the final cut he doesn't look angry. Not just angry at least. To me this means they changed the script.

I'd say the show hasn't changed anything fundamental about the books so far, not in the characters' dynamics and personalities (except Louis, good for him). So if in the books Daniel was turned out of love, I'm choosing to believe that the show won't change that. They might make us suffer by adding tension to his relationship with Armand, but they won't completely change the nature of that relationship.

i totally agree with you that in dubai we don’t see armand angry with daniel in the way we know he’s capable of being angry which is genuinely one of my favorite things.

this is more my personal headcanon than how i’m interpreting rolin’s words or what i think we’ll see or anything, but i can imagine armand turned him out of “spite” not because he was angry but because he was so hurt? i kind of imagine him thinking “oh, you wanted this so much 40 years ago, wanted it so much it ruined our relationship, could think of nothing else. i’ve warned you that it’s a curse, but you’ve ruined my life, so fine, i’ll ruin your life too. take THAT” and he’s thinking all of this while he gives daniel the gift and yet they’re both glad before long that he did. like a you think this is spite but it’s actually just love type thing

[ca-suffit]

i haven’t read the books but from the way some book stans talk about lestat like he’s some saint, i was not expecting sam in that interview to be like no actually he loves being evil and he’s really good at it and all the stuff about male rage/akasha and the devil being like wow he’s so terrible i need to recruit him actually. and i’ve seen the odd comment on twitter that’s like oh poor sam for having to put up with this lestat character assassination. like i don’t wanna call ppl out but i saw someone say “he signed up for anne rice’s iwtv, not rolin jones’s iwtv 😢” like ??? no actually he did sign up for rolin’s adaptation. and then they act like he’s so put out by the changes like a) he’s getting paid to pay his favorite character i think he’s okay. and b) even if he has reservations or questions about a change or even outright disagrees with one, he’s always full of praise for the final product and for rolin in general. like girl he is fine lol. like he said, some changes needed to be made and were for the greater good e.g. wrt improving the louis character.

I forget if he clarified in the interview or not, but that bit he says about going to hell comes right from the books

But what had I done to Claudia? And when would I have to pay for that? How long was she content to be the mystery that bound Louis and me so tightly together, the muse of our moonlit hours, the one object of devotion common to us both? Was it inevitable that she who would never have a woman's form would strike out at the demon father who condemned her to the body of a little china doll? I should have listened to Marius's warning. I should have stopped for one moment to reflect on it as I stood on the edge of that grand and intoxicating experiment: to make a vampire of "the least of these." I should have taken a deep breath. But you know, it was like playing the violin for Akasha. I wanted to do it. I wanted to see what would happen, I mean, with a beautiful little girl like that! Oh, Lestat, you deserve everything that ever happened to you. You'd better not die. You might actually go to hell. But why was it that for purely selfish reasons, I didn't listen to some of the advice given me? Why didn't I learn from any of them-Gabrielle, Armand, Marius? But then, I never have listened to anyone, really. Somehow or other, I never can.

he's not a saint (but he wants to be one for a second lol) but I personally didn't feel like he was that "evil" either. anne rice wasn't rly a good writer and fired her editor 3 books in on top of it. the series was unplanned and it's a wreck. he does awful shit but nothing I'd view makes him rly "evil," so it was a struggle for me to get on board with all that. an internal fight about how he views himself, I could understand, but idk what was rly that bad otherwise. especially cuz she was so in luv with him that consequences for anything he does just drop off as the books go? let me not write a whole thing about this lol. but ya the good and evil thing is from the books. the rice-a-ronis do mention it in posts sometimes but ever since the show has aired, everything has to be explained away now, bcuz they don't like black and brown characters or fans judging their white fav. he's either an innocent meow meow or a gothic monster, depending what mood they're in that day to dodge whatever criticism comes for them.

AMC explores a lot of stories about violent men so I've never understood this insistence like it's going to be some soft romantic series. the romance is gonna exist in the violence somehow, especially cuz they're vampires. louis slamming dreamstat's head into a rock wall while being goaded to do it bcuz dreamstat says it's the only way louis knows how to luv is sort of peak loustat for where we're at rn. I'm sure eventually they'll be more tender but it's still gonna have gritty undertones for the network it's on and who is writing it. the stans luv to make it about gendered shit, like rolin is ruining it all bcuz he's a man, but anne rice wrote violent, fucked up things too. worse than the show is prbly going to go. it's all excuses. u can just not like something without having to justify ur dislike of it to death. like damn. it's not ur taste, just stop watching??

and yes sam is a grown ass man getting prbly a good paycheck from this so loll he will be fine!

[sangcreole]

okay maybe don't read below if you want to avoid criticism of the show. sorry.

it's so funny like every time I think amciwtv can't get worse they just outdo themselves LMAO like at this point I've accepted that the characters are butchered and we'll never get anything remotely close to canon but like on a FUNDAMENTAL TECHNICAL LEVEL the writing is just?? dog shit????

The pacing is so fucking FAST and it's not even meaningful, I'm just being relentlessly pelted with shitty one-liners, and even the acting is so much worse but I know it's not even the actors' faults, like they have to do these volley scenes but the pacing is so fucking fast they're not even listening to each other!!!! and the writers clearly don't know what fucking audience they're writing for because on the rare occasion an actor talks slow enough for me to catch what they're saying, they're either trying to do a cheeky "easter egg" reference to book canon that doesn't fit into the world show canon, or they're hamming it up for the new fans who don't know the books and just obsess over funny zingers that they can gif later.

rolin jones turn on your location I just want to talk. you've already massacred the character of daniel molloy please stop parading around with his corpse and making him say racist homophobic shit.

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV S2: (Un)Answered Questions & Plot Holes

This is just me going thru my S2 Musings posts & collecting all my questions/concerns/complaints, which can hopefully be addressed or fixed in S3. As much as I love IWTV, I do wonder if the writer's strike effed things up, cuz some of this just don't make sense, Rolin.

WHY was Louis hallucinating Dream!Stat?

What was Lestat up to after the Trial & the Loustat breakup!?

When does Raglan James go rogue?

WTF is even happening with the Great Conversion?

WHO tried to interview vamps that the Talamasca knows about

HOW did Loumand not know their building was crawling with Talamasca spies?

Magnus

Armand's languages

Armand's religion

Papa DPDL

Claudia's diary pages

Armand's Backstory

Alice & Kate

Louis' photos

Louis' aerophobia

No Frankenstein?

The Script/Lestat's lies during the Trial

Lestat's bruises, no Tower Scene

The London Coven

Lestat's maker/fledgling telepathy in 1x2

Where were Claudia's diaries & yellow dress?

Loumand post-Paris and pre-Dubai

Daniel's Turning

When/Why did Sam go to the Talamasca?

Wtf is Dr Fareed up to in S3?

2x1:

1: WHY was Louis hallucinating Dream!Stat?

I still wanna know if this was a figment of Lou's imagination/guilt, or a symptom/manifestation of his mental illness. Is Lou REALLY schizo, or was Daniel just being an a-hole? (AND, is there a dream!Lou who visits Lestat in the dump? XD)

2x2:

2: What was Lestat up to after the Trial & the Loustat breakup!?

Ok, so we know Roget was right--Lestat was asleep after Mardi Gras, and Santiago woke him up for the Trial--WHEN though? As soon as Lou & Claudia arrived? Or when Santiago stole her diaries? (That would've just been an approx. 5yr nap; not a decades-long torpor like the ones Les had in the books.) But was Les asleep in NOLA after the Trial? Rolin said he wanted the reunion scene to be during Katrina, but the timeline didn't fit, so he used Odette instead. Was Lestat awake for Katrina? Did he sleep right through it? When did Lestat learn about Siri?

2x3:

3: When does Raglan James go rogue?

I'm very confused about this guy. We already get his threat/easter egg that he wants to Body Snatch someone and take over the Talamasca, so he's clearly already plotting. He got Armand's OG script from Sam, so I assume he still has access to the archives & agents--so they wouldn't've kicked him out yet. (Unless he hacked their database like he hacked Dan's laptop?)

Cuz he's complaining about not being well-funded, which is weird; the Talamasca THROW MONEY at their agents. And Raglan was kicked out of the Talamasca precisely cuz he was a kleptomaniac who made a fortune stealing people's money/identity--so he's got funds.

We didn't get to see the list of questions he said the Talamasca wanted Dan to ask Louis, either. What was THAT about? But Raglan did get Dan a Talamasca-approved publisher like he promised; and the Talamasca edited out...whatever it was that they didn't want mentioned--and what were THOSE edits? What does Louis know that the Talamasca says is off-limits, and what did the final cut of the book include & omit? Does this leave the door open for Lestat to come swooping in saying "Louis" lied on him, when really it was the Talamasca?

So IDFK know what's going on with Raglan (don't even get me started on Rashid), but I'm excited to find out!

4: WTF is even happening with the Great Conversion?

OK, we got confirmation that S3 WILL do Rockstar!Lestat (thank god), but y'all STILL left the Great Conversion hanging. Louis knew this was happening in like 1x2, and we haven't learned EFF ALL about it since. Why didn't we get Lou/Dan watching TV, listening to news reports about strange killings or something? Or even them talking about seeing more baby fledglings out & about?

Cuz it kinda defeats the purpose of Lou's book pissing the vamps off, if on the one hand they're gung-ho about secrecy & staying in the shadows, and on the other hand they're Turning noob vamps left & right!? So many, that the Talamasca's getting worried!? And why aren't they going after Daniel--HE'S the vampire on TV saying vamps are real!

Like, I get it--AMC's obv setting up the whole Amel plotline, where he wants/NEEDS Akasha to wake up & burn all the vamps, cuz his silver cord/neural link with all his fledglings is being stretched too thin if too many vamps are connected to him; so he wants to cull the herd. The Great Conversion's the last thing Amel would want. And it makes for easy fodder for Akasha, so we can have an epic scene of her just lighting mofos on fire. But other than that, the Great Conversion hasn't made much sense since y'all first mentioned it, sorry.

5: WHO tried to interview vamps that the Talamasca knows about?

6: HOW did Loumand not know their building was crawling with Talamasca spies?

I seriously hope AMC retcons this, and says that Raglan was shielding Daniel's thoughts from Loumand, cuz that's literally the only explanation that makes sense. We know from the books that the Talamasca could block even strong vampires like Lestat from reading their thoughts, but I'm stunned that Armand wasn't scanning Daniel's brain the whole time.

7: Magnus

I hate everything AMC did with the Magnus backstory--I hope this is just a matter of Armand (1) lying his arse off, and/or (2) not knowing wtf he's talking about. Just like Dream!Stat said: HA! 😡

8: Armand's languages

What Daniel said in 1x4 about Armand's Muslim prayers sounding Crimean/Ukranian or whatever has had everyone reeling ever since. But AMC never addressed it in S2! So wtf IS Armand? He says French is his 4th and poorest language--so I'm assuming:

he was born in Delhi, spoke Sanskrit (a la Arun in Sanskrit)

(???) this 2nd language is the one I'm confused about. Either this is the Crimean/Ukranian/Russian Armand learned when he converted(?) to Islam (WHEN??); or it's some other language. In the books, Andrei knew Greek when he was kidnapped & sold to the ship captain (which makes sense cuz of Greek Orthodox Catholicism), and that's how he initially communicated with the boys in Marius' palazzo), cus his amnesia made him forget his native Russian

Amadeo learned Venetian Italian from Marius' boys, and that's what he ended up speaking the whole time he was with the Children of Satan in Santino's coven

French, which he spoke when he was transferred to Paris to lead the Children of Darkness at Les Innocents

9: Armand's religion

10: Papa DPDL

11: Claudia's diary pages

NGL, I do wonder what all the fuss was about in 1x5 when Lou refused to show Daniel the rape pages, if he was just gonna tell us what happened in 2x3 anyways. 🙄 Is it cuz he realized Dan was right about not editorializing; wanting to be as honest as possible--getting "every detail right", like he said in 2x1? Lou told Armand he wasn't gonna share the pages with Dan, he just wanted to see them again--is it cuz he forgot what had actually happened to her? Yeah, IDK what was going on there.

2x4

12: Armand's Backstory

13: Alice & Kate

We never did find out if these chicks (and Dan's daughters) were even real.

14: Louis' photos

We never did find out wtf was going on with Louis' photos (my money's still on Rashid).

2x6:

15: Louis' aerophobia

Did Louis ever get to fly a plane, is all I wanna know, AMC. For reasons.

2x7:

16: No Frankenstein?

NGL, I'm holding out hope that Armand actually did chop Claudia's head off, and just kept HELLA QUIET about it cuz he was working so hard to come off innocent as possible. TVA spinoff tell-all WHENNN?

17: The Script/Lestat's lies during the Trial

WHERE and WHEN did Lestat sleep, before he went to America?

I think this was Lestat deliberately misdirecting the coven so they wouldn't know he found TWMBK.

1908 leaves a 2-year gap, since Lestat met Louis in NOLA in the winter of 1910. So WTF was Lestat up to? The math ain't mathin!

18: Lestat's bruises, no Tower Scene

AMC, this was quite possibly your biggest L all season. If it wasn't for the eagle-eyed fans spotting Lestat's bruises, we'd have NOTHING to even begin to hint that Lestat was being forced to participate in the Trial! Why on god's green earth did y'all not focus on that more--during the Loustat reunion would've been a great time for Lestat to let Louis know he only did it cuz he HAD to!

I wouldn't be surprised if the Trial's revisited to Gotcha! us in S3, when Lestat tells the "real" story 🙄, and we get Lestat's perspective, arriving in Paris, confronting Armand, and getting the coven's ultimatum. Cuz TBF, the Trial was being told strictly from Loumand's perspectives--what Louis remembered when he was going in & out of consciousness under the coven's Mind Gift assault; and what little Armand provided (that wasn't a lie). Louis wouldn't've been in any shape to notice light bruising on Lestat's wrists with one of his eyeballs literally hemorrhaging. And Armand CERTAINLY wasn't gonna bring up Les' bruises if he's the one that put them there--he was already shaking in his boots over "Banishment."

So I think this situation can still be salvaged--YES, it'll be a cop-out, but whatever; I just wanna see it. Rolin promised us that we';d see Lestat be "humbled," but I thought we'd get something way different. It's beyond ridiculous that y'all didn't make it clearer that Lestat had been tortured; especially cuz he seemed just fine during their rehearsal--and THAT would've been the moment to show him effed up before they dolled him up for the stage.

2x8:

19: The London Coven

20: Lestat's maker/fledgling telepathy in 1x2

21: Where were Claudia's diaries & yellow dress?

We clearly see Louis stuffing Claudia's dress & diaries in a burlap sack, and we clearly see the dress perfectly preserved in Dubai. So Daniel's question still holds: "Where were all these diaries in 1973?" There's also the question of when Louis started his "archives." I have several theories (X X), but yeah, I'm confused.

22: Loumand post-Paris and pre-Dubai

AMC, the math ain't mathin!

I need a frikkin Loumand timeline, AMC, this ish don't make no sense!

23: Daniel's Turning

Like. Wtf? I can't believe y'all offscreened Armand Turning Daniel. We'd better get a proper Devil's Minion segment in S3, istg; I NEED to see the gremlin terrorizing Daniel; it's pure comedy!

24: When/Why did Sam go to the Talamasca?

Just a spare thought--was it for asylum? Out of spite against Armand? Out of boredom? Seeking attention? What?

25: Wtf is Dr Fareed up to in S3?

I just hope we'll get the reveal that he's a vampire, and that we'll see his Maker Seth for the very first time on screen--hopefully as they side against Akasha! That would be a spiiiiiicy family reunion!

[canonicallysoulmates]

Jacob was on the Graham Norton Show yesterday- I will say I had never seen a full episode of this show, I'd only ever seen clips, the vibe is very different from the US late-night programs I'm used to and I don't know if it was just the lineup for this ep or if this is the norm for this show but I found myself laughing through almost the whole thing it is very entertaining that being said I wish the time among the guests had been divided better because, at least to me, Jacob is the one who got the least amount of attention and talking time which was really disappointing. I wish he had gotten asked more questions and had the opportunity to talk more about the show, and just gotten more focus/attention in general.

Nonetheless, I'm glad I watched it, if you didn't get the chance to watch it live somebody uploaded it online I'll leave a link at the bottom of this post just in case anyone wants to check it out but if you're in the US you will need a VPN to access it. It will also be up eventually on AMC+ so if you're willing to wait just keep an eye out for when it's loaded. He doesn't talk about s2 but he does talk about iwtv in general. He mentioned how the last time he was on the show he was there as the musical guest and one of the regular guests was Kirsten Dunst who played Claudia in the IWTV movie!

He says that Rolin Jones was able to adapt all of the books so he could bring things in from later on so Lestat on the show is bad but there's a little bit more pathos in him while Louis has a bit more backbone.

On the Loustat relationship, he says: "They fall very much in love but they sort of hate each other and love each other at the same time. They have this like really intense love affair that destroys both of their lives. And they decide to have a child!" He understands them so well.

They show a clip of iwtv it's of the moment Louis kills the alderman's attorney in ep 2. Jacob comments that the line "it was both random and unfortunate the man picked that night to dabble in fuckery" is probably one of his favorite lines he's ever said.

He also reveals the sound when he shows the vampire fangs was not intentional. When they were shooting they were trying to figure it out how to reveal teeth in a good way and he figured out one day the best way to do it was to do like a cat sound, to hiss so they did it and everybody else got on board except for Sam who was a little more reticent and wanted it to be taken seriously which is hilarious to me but at the same time I would expect nothing less from Sam 'actual vampire' Reid. So now vampires hiss!

He also talks a bit about Louis accent, he initially worked with a dialect coach who wanted him to do a French Creole accent which was apparently popular at the time but he didn't think he could do it so he just listened to people in cabs and shops.

And he says there were a lot of different variations of blood some of which were just for aesthetic purposes like the human blood which is dark, the vampire one is sparkly, but they made him a drinkable "blood" that was made of hibiscus tea, and raspberry but it was awful, it was like sour patch kids. Somebody from the iwtv crew drop the recipe cause I love Sour Patch Kids.

As a random note, this man is so cute, I wanna hug him.

Like I said I'll leave a link here for anybody who is interested in watching the full thing, a reminder if you're in the US you'll need a VPN or alternatively you can download it to watch:

Jacob Anderson on the Graham Norton Show

[rapha-reads]

I'm listening to some interviews by the cast and crew of IWTV, and I love how they often call themselves their characters. Like, Eric talking about Daniel would go "And so I am at this point of life". Or even Rolin talking about Louis goes "we need to think about who Jacob is in Dubai". And they don't even realise they do it most of the time. They're like absolutely possessed by theze characters they're bringing to life, to the point that there's little separation between actor and character. The ones who do it the less and correct themselves each time are Assad and Delaney. It's fascinating.

[dreadfuldevotee]

exactly. while it's valid to critique armand's actions in the show and i do need him to get comeuppance in s3, i agree that certain anti loumand takes really seem to lack nuance. it's really the refusal from these antis to see the moments when louis and armand are genuinely vulnerable with one another. fans act like louis wasn't sincerely listening to armand in that museum scene, some even claimed that louis mocking him. but it was obvious from the way louis spoke that learning about armand's past did affect him. like people don't have to ship them, but reducing every action that louis and armand take with one another as just purely calculated or denying that they ever loved each other? doesn't make sense with the story shown to us.

(also side-eyeing the fans who think that louis would be disparaging about sex with armand, just so lestat can be propped up as the superior choice? some of them are lowkey racist about it too and it's fucking weird)

"The two of them getting to meet again when they have both rediscovered themselves, and seeing each other in new lights would be everything to me."

you! you get it. the potential of what armand and louis could be post divorce actually compels me. both characters have so much to work on with their identities, how will this change their dynamic moving forward?

You are absolutely right. The compounding factors of Loustat's favor among fans & production and straight up racist ideas of the sexualities of Black and Asian men (Louis being construed as sexually aggressive for being in a consensual sexual dynamic where he is dominant or; Constant denial that Armand could be desired by the rest of the characters leading to him magically coercing people into being physical with him or just straight up lying about encounters- typically to prop up a white romantic rival) make up a large part of miss-readings of this relationship and frankly the entire season.

It's not a new concept that people get attached to a ship, especially one(s) they know are Endgame and then come up with ways to make every other relationship about that endgame or just straight up denying any narrative or emotional impact it deserves. But it still pisses me off to see it happen here. I think the first time I read people saying that Madeleine was actually feeling Louis' love of Lestat during the café scene, I started contemplating my own sanity.

I'm really excited to see where both their characters go during s3 and though I am eager to see them interact at length again, I don't want to rush that reconnection because I want it to be earned. Keeping hope alive that Rolin & Co. balance all these complex emotions and ever shifting relationships. For my own personal vindication if nothing else

[nalyra-dreaming]

Pre season 2 rant - heavy on sarcasm!

This is the... well by now somewhat meditated on rant I promised a while ago. It has a lot of cussing, so be warned.

It is a… summary comment about some views I‘ve seen around, from “bad writing“ to the “abuse“ and other things. Oh, and it's about the "lying" subject. With receipts!

I‘m getting this out of my system before season 2 hits, and before more of the press leading up to it is released, because cast, crew and writers as well as the show have given us all of it already and, tbh, if I‘m going to see anyone scream “bad writing“ or “Louis being made a liar or the memories revisited/changed is racism“ when the changes will hit I‘m just gonna block you.

Fair warning.

This is long… so under the cut.

This show has made color-conscious choices. Brilliantly so. They also have an astonishing meta level.

And what we saw was not the truth.

That much is clear now. HAS ACTUALLY BEEN CLEAR FROM THE END OF SEASON 1 ON.

Jacob has said at the TCA panel that Louis is trying to regain his true memories.

Here is a reminder of some key statements by cast and crew:

Here are interviews and statements by Assad and Jacob and Sam and Rolin and the writers & producers that what we have seen was not the (whole) truth, that Louis’ tale has been “tinkered” with, influenced.

I'm heroically refraining from adding the gifs of Rolin and his statement again. Which are from the episode insider… and remember when that aired?! Yeah… 😒

But I've seen things recently that make me want to pull my hair out, to be frank. For example this, behind the link:

...Like, not making him a whole flat ass liar is actually the point, guys. And no it does not undermine the story....

As the writers said:

I mean, I get it to an extent. It's becoming clearer and clearer that the show some people made up in their heads is not the one they'll be getting. (We've been trying to tell them, but hey.)

Yeah.... That.

Unfortunately @blackgirlasis has blocked me, (and I have returned the favor now that I noticed), we only discussed something recently, but I think the reason might have been after I posted that video, in which it is literally said that "not everything Louis says is a lie", which, given her statements here might speak for itself, especially this part of that statement:

"It is actually ACTIVELY harmful to perpetuate the idea that the Black characters aren't to be trusted with the narrative and that we need Lestat to come through with the honest accounting."

You know, I would actually agree! Which is also why I always emphasized that we did not get the WHOLE truth. I also kept more than hinting at the fact that Armand is, well Armand.

BUT - and here it gets interesting - why is JACOB's - a BLACK man's - statement discarded? Why do they do not want to hear it that Louis does, in fact, lie? And, just to be clear - I do not NEED Louis to lie, nor be proven a liar, and I think the show will do its damndest to explain via the "tinkering" that Armand did. They will give some of the blame to Armand.

But to flip one's shit over argumentation that the MAIN CHARACTER, a BLACK MAN has already stated... that is what I find interesting.

Like, why do you* (*generally spoken, not her especially) accuse people of racism over this, when HE has already said that Louis does, indeed, lie. Why is he not actually listened to? I don't get that. Why is agency taken away from a living, breathing person to give it to a fictional character? Why is his statement that "not all representation needs to be healthy representation" not kept in mind?

Louis is Louis. Louis being color-consciously handled didn't "change the character an awful lot".

JACOB said that. Here. Interestingly enough in a comment about the racial consideration the show does(!).

Louis is NOT a whole other character despite the changes, and the twists that will happen in season 2 were always set to come, as the friggin' video of BEFORE the show aired is proof of. They talked about all that. They know it didn't all happen as shown. They knew Louis did lie. But NOT about everything.

They also knew that some of the scenes did not happen (at least as shown). And now... "it’s clear that Louis is somebody hugely angry with a man he loved deeply and now presents them as a monster…" Also Jacob Anderson.

Presents. Them. As. A. Monster.

Bailey Bass said in the SDCC interview, that it is not clear who is the "villain here" in various scenes, interestingly enough, because the dynamic keeps changing. Which of course was after they shot a myriad of scenes that would not make it into the final s1 cut. Again: why is she not listened to? Why do you take her agency away to give it to a fictional character?

And I'm not even starting on the others. Sam. Rolin. The writers.

Also, re the abuse and scenes being revisited. Again, screenshot as example:

There is nothing simple about this show. Especially that scene.

BUT the show knows what it‘s doing! I'm not going to rehash all that here now, here are links on that.

AND THE WRITERS SAYING IT WILL BE REVISITED... is from December 21, 2022.

DECEMBER 22.

A revisit and a change of that scene will not be bad writing. (Or tasteless.) They already DID so in the last episode of season 1, continuing that will simply fall into line with what we have already been given. That's not bad writing. That's just the show, and there's people who just did not want to examine that.

Because it will be echoed, and it will serve a purpose.

I know the show did the meta level of patriarchal domestic abuse, but for fuck‘s sake, the story itself is about vampires struggling, and Louis is struggling.

The show has a meta level of abuse, and patriarchy, and recognizing is valid and the meta discussions are too.

But Louis is not chained to his coffin guys, he could have left, and a fight which shows off power discrepancies within the show story line is not automatically domestic abuse.

*slow clap*

No-one wants this to happen for the sake of "redeeming" Lestat. Because he does not need that redemption. They're all murderers and monsters.

They kill. For a living. LITERALLY.

THEY ARE VAMPIRES It's not about vampires trying to find their humanity.

It's about vampires trying to find a way to live with themselves, because they are, indeed, monsters.

Doubting the narrative which was TORN APART WITHIN THE SHOW is not the same as bad writing or racism FFS, nor is actually looking at what we're given - and knowing the fucking, 50 year old books. And recognizing the hints and parallels.

I have also seen the take that Lestat isolated Louis... and like, did we watch the same show? You know, even with the vampirism (which, of course™, could not free Louis as promised)...

Months of flirting openly in NOLA, public wooing. DECADES LIVING IN NOLA. Operas. Restaurants. Family dinners. (And Louis stopping Lestat there, AS a mortal...) Cleaning the cribs, years of "human entanglement" because Louis wanted it.... Banjo barbecues, political influence, wakes... Everybody knew.

(Like, I could pull up gifs here.)

"Isolation". Right. It has nothing, at all, to do with the Rite of Passage, or Louis' depression.

Of course not.

I mean, Jacob says that Louis is very depressed during the time leading up to the fight, and his and Sam's discussion here is interesting as well, but hey, I mean, why listen to the actual black actor, right.

As a last thing.

Yeah. Tell me you know nothing about the books without telling me you know nothing about the books.

And, as a note, context is important if you pull up other scenes from the VC.

Welcome to the fucking Vampire Chronicles.

Anyone expecting big bad patriarchal abuser Lestat is not going to have a good time.

And honestly, to those: don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Good riddance - and BON VOYAGE

[thelioncourts]

Do you think the series will really have 8 seasons? I heard some horrible stories about TVC' latter books and I'm just wondering how long they can go before going too far,you know like ''they should had stopped earlier ''.

I think they should focus on more episodes by season than too many seasons.

And I don't really want to wait 5-6 more seasons before Louis and Lestat get back together.

I think 7/8 seasons it probable for this series, and it does seem daunting but I think there's enough good in the books + there's what is original for the show itself so I think that will get them far. clarifying that I don't actually know anything and am merely guessing, but:

S1 - IwtV

S2 - IwtV

S3 - TVL

S4 - QotD

S5 - Some mix of TotBT/Memnoch/an array of things that show unrest in the vampire world

S6 - PL

S7/S8 - PL/PLatRoA/BC

this is a simplification of it because, obviously, the show is much more of an ensemble cast than the books and so we're going to be exploring Daniel, Armand, Louis, perhaps Gabrielle depending on how much they want to include her, etc. and this isn't me getting into vague 'what I think those seasons might look like' but these are the books/broadest storylines I think they might explore.

IwtV had to be two season for a lot of reasons: 1) 7 episodes for the one book would have been a travesty 2) fleshing out of Louis as a character to include him more 3) the establishment of the Family (Lestat, Louis, Claudia) and how that is the driving force of the entire series/the reconciliation of Loustat, etc. 4) the 2022 Dubai storyline being entirely uncharted territory/establishing Daniel as a prominent character 5) the way other characters get a lot more exploration than they do in the books (Armand, Daniel, Madeleine, Claudia even, Lestat, Louis, etc.) because that is how you get people invested. and probably more things, but these are the important ones.

I have no proof, I'm just guessing, but I think we may start getting 10 episodes a season (I think this because of ratings and because of the fanbase, again, no proof of this, I'm throwing out gut feelings here)

the later books definitely are a mess (so are the earlier ones in a lot of ways, there's good but just! a lot), in a lot of ways, but there are some good things and there's a really great writing team that can take it and make it amazing, I think. and, again, there's going to be originality taking place because Louis and Daniel and even Armand are fairly absent in a lot of the books as it becomes the Lestat-story.

so I do have faith that 7/8 seasons will be just fine for this show, but I would start to get nervous if it went beyond that (and, again, it could be totally fine, but I also think they're focused on quality and would stop when they have told their story as they wanted to - and because, I think, they have a lot more they could do with the vampires in the new talamasca series or even in other spinoffs (night island, my beloved, etc.).

AS FOR LOUSTAT, listen. it's not going to take 8 seasons for them to get back together. I know Rolin joked about it but that man is sarcastic as hell and jokes a lot, I wish it would have been a video interview so we could have heard it.

my genuine Loustat theory - from the bottom of my heart I feel this - is that we will see them get back together in s3. I think it will be in the last 2/3 episodes of the season, and their feelings that have been brewing and spilling over all season will come to a head and they'll get back together and we'll get 2/3 episodes of happiness, where it's like 'wow, this is what they needed, this is what it was always supposed to be' only for Akasha to snatch Lestat from Louis at as the final scene of s3. and they'll be apart for most of s4 as the vampires band together to stop Akasha and get Lestat back.

then, by s5, they'll be together fully and we'll be able to explore a lot of other things while still seeing Loustat be a couple that has things to work on without their issues being the only major conflict as that would get boring given that their issues are driving factors of the conflict in s1-s2, and, no doubt, s3.

anyway, idk if this makes sense, and - once again - I am just putting thoughts out there.

[thecactifindahome]

Ok but I am curious to know your mini essa that you wrote in the tags of that Loumand fight scene ashahaha

Oh, I wouldn't elevate it by calling it an essay, lol. More like a many-car pileup on the freeway as all of my reactions try to merge without using their turn signals. Lots of half formed ideas which require three or four more half formed ideas to introduce them, nothing I needed to inflict on the OP of that post.

I'll probably need a few more days for my opinions to settle, but the gist of my feelings right now is that I just don't think I'm on the same page as the writers. Some emotional beats they clearly intended to land hard barely grazed me, and some things they probably meant to be trivial had me ready to commit murder with my bare hands.

As for the argument itself! Well, I've never been coy about having a favorite, and I'm never going to cherish someone else's favorite over my own, whether that someone else is Anne Rice or Rolin Jones or just some guy. I'm not interested in being fair and I'm not interested in playing AITA for serial killers. I'm looking at it as my special little princess having an unpleasant exchange with the man who made me listen to his masturbatory speech about the Parisian art scene last week. The worst thing a fictional character can do is annoy me in real life.

[crazykuroneko]

Tbh I think a lot casual viewers / non book fans are probably going to not continue the show after s2 unless it diverges quite drastically on louis's storyline? iwtv is very bleak and I genuinely think they underestimated how much show viewers ended up hating lestat after s1 (and they may end up in a similar situation with armand in s2) and then you're asking the audience to watch an entire season of this guy's whole backstory. plus you're killing off one of the two likable characters by the end of s2 and shifting louis into more a side character.

a big red flag to me was the lady who hosts the podcast who doesn't have a book background saying a lot of the same stuff as show-only people. like she clearly does not like lestat or loustat at all lmao and its literally her job to promote the show.

First, I want to address the "shifting louis into more a side character" because no I don't agree with that. Contrary to fans believe, Hollywood-standard wise (from the number of episodes they are in, how integral their characters are to the story), both Jacob and Sam have been considered as lead actors/cast of IWTV. You can see industry news outlets calling them both as such. But because IWTV is about Louis' past specifically and AMC knew IWTV still has some hope in Emmys even though it's small, they put them in different categories to not split the votes between them (they even only submit one actor in each category for it). So, look at what we have now, Louis is the narrator yet we still get Lestat in all episodes, and he's leading the NOLA narrative forward together with Louis despite not existing in the Dubai narrative. I bet we'll still get Lestat in most, if not all episodes, in S2, because Rolin has said many many times, the show is about both of them. And I expect they'll do the same in TVL season(s); Lestat is telling the story while Louis is leading whatever will be going on in the modern time. (No, i don't believe they'll make Louis stuck on a couch the whole season to listen to Lestat's story even though it sounds tasty. He'd definitely have a way to know what Lestat's saying, but I don't see anything good writing-wise from sticking your well-developed character in one place for such a long time)

About whether the audience will be willing to listen to Lestat's past, I'll see how S2 goes first before judging that. A lot of people don't like him, but there are a lot of them who are like, "I will miss him if he dies, he's an interesting character".

And IWTV is a niche show, its genre is gothic horror/romance. Who the hell is doing gothic romance for a series in this decade? (Hannibal doesn't count, it's not gothic and still about will/won't they). Like, what AMC is doing with IWTV now is extremely daring. And with a niche show, it's always the same: you can't please everyone. There will always be part of the general audience who will leave because either it's simply not their cup of tea or they can't stomach it. Especially now when there's this purity sentiment going so strongly in general (apparently now we shouldn't ship fictional characters, every sex scene has to have a grand purpose, and you shouldn't watch any portrayal of abuse even though it's produced by the victim herself). God forbid IWTV would ever want to please those people yikes. So, IWTV won't ever get as "mainstream" as what, Succession, Ted Lasso, Better Call Saul. But IWTV would still appeal to people who appreciate good writing, people who are "idc how bad the characters are as long as they're exciting!", and people who really love horror (not that "comfort horror" BS) - there's this review of IWTV from an horror website who is like "I wish they gave us more gore and horror of vampires", oh these people would love S2.

So, tl;dr you could say it's a natural selection (hell yes Darwinism), it's inevitable. I'd rather have that audience leave than stay and ruin fans' experience by whining about the plot that won't ever satisfy them. And I'd always applaud writers who don't give a shit to what people say and stick to what they're meant to do. They slay!

EDIT: ah I forgot about this. but don't underestimate the number of old fans who will probably check the show again when the TVL season(s) come. Because no matter how big their hatred for AMC is, it will be the first time ever for TVL to be adapted on screen. First time in 38 years (yes no one considers QotD movie ever existed). That's too big a temptation!

[thriev]

re: caroline and elena sharing love interests (ft. why i love for/wood and why i'm not so hot on ste/roline).

basically, i don't think it's a coincidence that caroline ends up going for men that elena has dated (talking about matt and stefan here). it's not intentional either, just like a... subconscious thing.

caroline's entire life she's been compared (by herself and other people) to elena and so elena becomes the epitome of everything caroline should be. the perfect daughter, perfect girlfriend, etc etc. it's only natural that caroline ends up wanting to emulate elena's relationships too. especially because they seem so much more meaningful than any relationship caroline has had herself. at first it's elena and matt, high school sweethearts, so sickeningly cute and in love. at that point caroline's never actually been in love herself, so she sees their relationship and she takes notes. so when matt's single, and available, and nice to her, she takes her chance with him, because she saw him with elena. and she she wants that god damn it! she wants a proper romance, a real love, a relationship that's deeper than any of the ones she's had before.

and the terrible thing is that she actually gets what she wants. matt's her first love and they become that cute, sweet couple she's always dreamed of, but then things fall apart pretty quickly. she blames becoming a vampire (and yes, that is technically why they break up) but i think they were always destined to break up. maroline at the end of the day were just an imitation mattlena so i don't think they would've been endgame. that's not to say they didn't genuinely like or love each other, but matt still had lingering feelings for elena the whole way through, and caroline wanted something from him more than she actually wanted him.

that's why her second relationship, with tyler, was so important to her (and her character arc). not only is he entirely removed from elena, but they both fell into the relationship together (as opposed to ma/roline where matt was initially either on an entirely different page or denying he felt the same way). caroline also wasn't looking for something with tyler, holding him up to some kind of weird pedestal she's crafted for him in her head. while matt's her first love in many ways, i kinda also consider tyler her first love in a maybe stronger, more truer sense. her relationship with tyler is all them, it's not about anyone else, that's why it's so sexy!!!!!! why it's so important!!!!!!!!!!! i think a lot of her other relationships fuck with her sense of self worth, but her relationship with tyler is the first one that boosts it. strengthens it.

so. okay. putting her with stefan at the end is a choice. i get the appeal of friends to lovers and i do think they're sweet. like yay a full circle moment. the june wedding!! but i also feel like in a way it backtracks on some of care's development? 😭 she moved on from all her elena hangups, only to end up with the man she was convinced was elena's soulmate??? you could argue that this is actually the truest proof of her getting over her elena stuff, by dating a guy who was literally fated to be with her, but.... no. good relationships don't always have to mean character arcs/development but what did ste/roline do for caroline other than make her sad and insecure again for a chunk of the show? and listen. there is simply no way to date stefan without being in elena's shadow. caroline was there for all of it!!!!! she witnessed everything first hand!!!! how they got together, and how they ultimately fell apart. and maybe you or someone else would be strong enough to get over that but caroline???? being with stefan would only slowly push her back into her old insecurities like i just know it.

mar/oline was very much a stepping stone relationship for caroline, something to help her realise what she wanted/what she didn't want/what does and doesn't work/and maybe to help her get over her elena problem for good. for/wood was a relationship that taught her about love, helped her find her self worth, made her a more compassionate person, and gave her something that was (for once) all her own. ste/roline was there. it did something for someone but it certainly didn't do caroline (or me) any favours 🤧.