#iwtv blogging

[lestcat-de-lioncourt]

Lestat: lmao he's back again, he's back AGAIN, what did I tell you

Louis: OMG shut UP

[venndaai]

when we get this scene on the show it’s all over for us

[mulderscully]

people keep saying loustat were seperated for 70 years but 77 is way closer to 80 than 70.. that's a whole human life span....

[cryptidlark]

I know this is in part a problem with the movie’s pacing that will be resolved in the show by allowing louis and armand to spend a season together but I think it’s so funny how easy it to seduce brad pitt louis. antonio banderas told him he was pretty once and he instantly goes off about how armand would never hide anything from him and will be his teacher and companion and equal UNLIKE lying manipulative lestat. boy never stood a chance

[fitzrove]

iwtv s2e2 spoilers part2

shshjsjddj "louis for the past 500 years i have built my entire identity on being a bdsm sub and i don't intend to change that"

(i love them they're so wrong together xD i know everyone ships them with other people but thats no fun when them being together can make both of their lives AND everyone else's worse)

[portmantaur]

I’ve been thinking about it, and I’ve somewhat changed my mind. I still think there’s some truth to the whole ‘no such thing as a truly reliable narrator’ angle in the iwtv series, but i also think we as an audience are in fact meant to process the fact that lestat’s version of Claudia’s turning and the Big Fight are really, really not reflective of reality

Firstly, because in season 1, we didn’t get those events from Louis’ perspective. We got both of those events from Claudia’s diary, with Louis’ commentary. I mean, the episode of her turning is when the narrative source so distinctly changes that we get her actual voiceover to indicate it. And yes i definitely believe that Claudia’s anti-lestat bias colors her narrative, but to me that is much more reflective of someone who is processing abuse than someone who is, say, defining their history for audience interpretation. Lestat is recounting on stage for a spectacle, Claudia was recording in her diary in place of having literally anyone even mildly objective to talk to. Claudia’s reliability as a narrator is not subject to the same scrutiny as leatat’s, imo, not least of all because her diaries were never actually intended to be shared.

Secondly, and this is absolutely born of the Continuity Inconsistency Spotter in me, because of lestat’s hair. In the original S1 cut, for Claudia’s turning, lestat has his hair cut to just about his neck. Again this is from primarily Claudia and Louis’ perspective, and given how very clearly and materially Louis has been able to recall lestat’s appearance over time, i see no reason to believe that his short hair is not an accurate recollection of his appearance at the time.

In lestat’s on-stage version of events, he has the exact same long haircut he has at the time of the play. I know this could be handwaived away as continuity error, but so far this show hasn’t really done anything so visually inconsistent that there hasn’t been payoff for - at least, not that I’ve seen, particularly surrounding the imagery of the theater. I mean we’ve already got the whole visual of ‘if Sam is guarding Armand, but Sam is also putting Louis in his coffin, then who’s flying the plane (and willingly not saving Claudia & madeleine)?!’ aspect in the same episode. We’ve got the rocks from Louis’ living burial in the tree room of Dubai, we’ve got Armand’s ‘I could not prevent it’ performance of oh-so-effortfully manipulating the minds of a room full of mortals directly contrasting the ease & nonchalance with which he previously froze time/cognition within a whole restaurant & a long table full of his coven members. It doesn’t seem like a careless mistake to me, it seems to me to be another purposeful choice in a series of similar choices that highlight the fact that the unreliability of previous narration involving Louis and Claudia is unreliable in the way most narrators can be, whereas almost the entirety of the narrative involving the trial is distorted very much on purpose for the sake of manipulating an audience.

Like even Armand is saying, during the interview, that lestat could not be bound by a script. The script itself is largely a lie - only so much of the truth as could be bent into serving the pre-decided resolution of the mock-trial. I don’t think there’s any reason to believe that lestat going off script is indicative of him suddenly telling the whole truth, but rather his altering of the narrative to suit himself above all (hence his apology; im not even going to debate the legitimacy of it bc I don’t even think that’s super relevant to my point, I just think that lestat wanted to force Louis and possibly Claudia to listen to a perfected version of the apology he had been trying to manufacture since the incident itself, and that was more important to him than anything in the script)

anyway part of me also thinks the clear lack of intervention by Armand was at least in part because he didn’t believe he could ever have the fullness of Louis’ attention as long as Claudia (& by extension madeleine, but also her in her own right being Louis’ fledgling) existed. But Armand is a beautiful fool because Louis doesn’t give anyone the fullness of his attention mostly bc he doesn’t know how to do that. Louis can’t love anyone closer than arm’s length, even (& especially) Claudia. Like, just the way Claudia knew her decision to invest her attention and love in someone else was right when Louis refused to level with her about ‘does it matter? I got the result’, I think she very much included herself when she scolded him in the whole ‘love makes you stupid’ scene. Not romantically, but she had to have known by then that after neglecting her for lestat, Louis spent so much time turned inward and not indulging the very man/relationship for whom he neglected Claudia.

Long post long post im unwell & so are my vampire blorbos.

[queerhoodies]

Interview With The Vampire 2.01 "What Can The Damned Really Say To The Damned"

"The Kiss of Judas" by Jakob Smits

Interview With The Vampire 2.06 "Like The Light By Which God Made The World Before He Made Light"

[sophsun1]

Interview With The Vampire – 2.05: Don't Be Afraid, Just Start the Tape

[johnwickfucker]

LOVEEEE me an unreliable narrator

holy shit the "was it raining, louis?" scene was Genius

[sleepoutro]

The Dubai Penthouse Bedroom set, from Mara Lepere-Schloop's Instagram

"As promised! IWTVs2 The Dubai Bedroom (built on stage in Prague). One of my favorite sets EVER… that we of course saw very little of. Thanks Rolin. (🖤) Art direction: Martina Ter-Akopowa, Pavel Krejci Set decoration: helene_maroutian Props: ellenfreund Co-Design: kz___ Set Design: Vanda Martinkova

[holocrone]

INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE 2.02 › Do You Know What It Means to Be Loved by Death

[lucky-draws]

evil vampires need 2 things. a nice robe and an emotional support rectangle

[venndaai]

I did have my concerns about Claudia and Madeleine as perfect tragic victims but I think the show threaded the needle beyond my highest expectations. they're still monsters- delightfully unconcerned with morality- and there are definite potential points of tension in their relationship- what makes them special is not innocence but the ability to genuinely trust each other, that let them break out of the cycle of abuse; and it's this which puts them outside of Louis and Armand's understanding and outside of their story

[mulderscully]

if lestat killed me after we had sex that's on me he caught me slipping

[cryptidlark]

finally watched interview with the vampire (1994). I’ve read the books and seen the show so obviously I was expecting the extremely high levels of homoeroticism but jesus how did brad pitt get that close to antonio banderas’ face without making out

[maggiecheungs]

JACOB ANDERSON as LOUIS DE POINTE DU LAC in INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE (2022-)

S1E1: IN THROES OF INCREASING WONDER S2E8: AND THAT'S THE END OF IT. THERE'S NOTHING ELSE