#iwtv story speculation

[cbrownjc]

On the bit about the core "skipping" Mekare in the show, if the show combines the Akasha and Amel threats, I agree. In fact, if the threats are combined, then I, personally, think that whomever died during the Amel threat will die during the combined threat of Akasha and Amel. Which, from the few things I do know about the Prince Lestat book, means some of the older Children of the Millennium vampires, at the very least, will die by the end.

Which actually has me thinking the show might change how someone like Santino died. Meaning they'll have it happen during the combined Akasha-Amel threat instead of how it happened toward the end of Blood and Gold. But that's just a speculation, for now, mostly built on me thinking that if we hear any of Marius' backstory from that book, it'll be something he tells to Daniel (and Armand), not Thorne. Thorne is the type of character an adaptation can easily cut, or just give a minor nod/appearance to in a different way. But I digress.

Anyway, if Makare ever takes the core within her from Akasha, it will only be for a short period of time, during the same season I would guess, before it passes on to Lestat. And I think it'll be toward the end of Season 5 when Lestat will finally get it.

Because, at the end of the day, I feel very much that this is what the first five seasons of the show are headed towards -- Lestat becoming the holder of the Sacred Core by the end of Season 5.

That is the major story arc of the show that has already been planned out and is being set up in these early seasons IMO, and why Rolin Jones said that Prince Lestat is a book they are drawing hugely from for the show.

So yes, I agree, RJ knows exactly where the story in the show is headed for at least the first five seasons of it IMO. And the story from the book Prince Lestat, which had him becoming the holder of the Sacred Core, is that story. So things like revisiting the fight from EP05 are not them trying to "fix" anything because of fandom outrage or whatever. They were always going to revisit that fight and had always planned to do so given how it was purposefully shot in Season 1, with only Claudia's POV given to us, the viewers, and no one else's.

Season 2 was always set to show us Louis' POV of that fight, which will give greater context to what happened upstairs . . . and IMO begin the process of setting up Amel. Louis won't know it's Amel and people who've never read the books won't know it's Amel either. But it will be a "seed" as Assad called it . . . a seed of things being planted now that will grow over time for the full story that is coming.

That's what we are seeing right now with Nicki's presence (and Marius' too because yes, I am firmly in the Justin Kirk is Marius camp). We'll be seeing everything regarding Nicki from Armand's POV because this is not only going to be a parallel made between Nicki and Louis and Armand's treatment/care of both, but because Nicki is also a seed that we'll see in ever greater bloom and context in Season 3 when we finally get Lestat's POV.

And yes, the only reason Gabrielle isn't in those scenes too is because they are from Armand's POV and Armand doesn't like nor care about Gabrielle. That's all. She will very much be there when those scenes between Armand and Lestat where we know she was present too are revised from Lestat's POV in Season 3.

So yes, the show has a very solid story plan for the first five seasons, I feel sure of. All to lead up to Lestat gaining the Sacred Core by the end, and that Amel has been being set up by the show since Season 1, for that very purpose. Things like this have all been about setting up major story arcs, not because they fear not getting another season or anything like that.

(AMC outright owning the rights to The Vampire Chronicles means the show is never going to easily get canceled anyway, which is why I can feel confident about all of this BTW.)

"Worried about the Nicki/TVL content" here for clarification. I apologize, that came off like I didn't want to see TVL/Nicki. I'm excited to see Louis' journey through Europe and very excited for the theatre des vampires. I'm also very excited to see Lestat's backstory, including Nicki's part in it. What I meant is I'm worried that the showrunner might have been worried they weren't getting a season 3 so they packed in TVL and Nicki into season 2 so audiences got the backstory for Louis, Armand, and the theatre and how that ties to Lestat because they didn't want to leave questions because they may not get a season 3.

I want them to take their time with each major plot point and i wondered if cramming so much in was a hint that there was not going to be a renewal. But your response to my first ask was reassuring. I just really need to see the entire story play out before they end the show and I panicked so much advertisement of TVL in season 2 was an indication that this would be the only time we see it. Does that make sense?

Also, what plot points or storylines do you think we will see in season 3 in addition to TVL because the show always has more than one book or storyline going?

Ah ok :) It does make sense, but I honestly wouldn't worry too much.

For example Rolin talked about Lestat and Gabrielle at the SDCC '22 panel and so far there is no hint of Gabrielle - which makes sense, because Armand does not particularly like her... he probably omits her in his retelling of what happened.

But I don't think Rolin is going to omit her :) ... pass on the possibility to ... dip into that mess, too^^

And Rolin has already talked about Lestat's turning (and it being the literal worst of all the vampires' turnings) in the podcast back then, too. TVL is why Rolin wanted to do the show.

So. I wouldn't worry too much. AMC is financially out of the woods, the modus operandi seems to be the same as last season, and they are ramping up promotion, they are still developing the other shows, too. They said they are in for the long run, and there was once talk of 10 seasons... now I am not optimistic enough to hope for that much *laughs*, but... I'd love it :)) Definitely. Supposedly Sam was signed for 5 seasons though (off the bat). We'll see.

As per story lines... well, I mean, they will need to keep Dubai fresh, so that will develop further, and then, of course, in Lestat's past there is a lot they can hook into as well.

Magnus shows up as a ghost in the later books, too, so who knows, they might explore that aspect already (and there maybe the origins of the Talamasca???) in some kind of fashion. It would serve to introduce Benedict and Rhoshamandes here, too, given the later arcs. Marius' arc, of course, though if the rumor re Justin Kirk holds then they are going towards Marius' story and TWMBK (and possibly QotD) in s4 and s5. Gabrielle could be introduced in Dubai, and maybe bring in Sevraine, I mean Fareed is already there, the ancient vampires are there already, somewhere, out of sight, but there is a lot of possibility :)

And, of course, if they actually bring in Fareed again (which might be needed, given Daniel's health status), then Seth cannot be that far, and through Seth we could get an introduction to Gregory and Mekare, and Maharet, and Khayman, and... whoever else.

The Dubai TL is mixed up already, and I for one love it, because it allows for so much.

For example the piano music in the show... I would have loved it if that had been a live stream, of Sybille playing (for example). You know? Little things.

Sam said that there would be (more/other) cameo's coming in s2, so... I fully expect there to be more vampires, probably only apparent to those who know^^. (Just like last time^^)

Also: by now I do think we will get yet another revisit of episode 5 in s3. From Lestat's POV.

Because there is something there that I have touched on, that @cbrownjc has touched on... namely that we will now get to that the fight was more an actual "fight" downstairs, but even more interestingly, we will in all likelihood see why the fight rekindled upstairs. And... here comes something Lestat says in episode 6 into play, namely: "I don't know what possessed me that night."

Now, anyone who has read the last books (which Rolin as stated takes from) knows that Amel's awakening is bloody, drawn to violence, and that he takes over sometimes. He also likes to be in Lestat.

If the basic structure of the fight stays as it is there has to be a reason why that fight rekindled upstairs, and why it continued then with such a drastic power-imbalance, and why Lestat went on about his "nature", something which I have always found weird.

However, if they are already setting up Amel... I have theorized before that they might combine Akasha and Amel, since the actual threats (the burnings) are quite similar and it would be too repetitive for the show.

IF they are, indeed, already setting up Amel, then we will see the "reason" why it all went shit in Louis' POV next season, and then get the personal account of what happened there in s3. Louis won't be able to make much sense of it yet, neither will Armand, nor Daniel, and not even Marius (in all likelihood). But as these lines have not been come into play yet (and this show does not waste lines) I fully expect them to come back.

And then, if Lestat recounts the possession that story line can segue into s4 and s5 of Akasha/Amel rising, they'll probably skip the "core" going to Mekare first, I think Lestat will take it directly, maybe with the threat of Rhoshamandes thrown in or after, depending.

As I said before, I think they know how they want to do the first 5 or so seasons, and this... this is how I think it might come together :))

Obviously this is the "rough cut" - the details will be the most interesting thing.

What did Louis say in the trailer?

"We should get every detail right."

Indeed.

[anyfire]

If you are crazy enough anything can be s3 tour photographer louis foreshadowing

[cbrownjc]

Spoiler talk and thought for 2x08 (Mostly regarding Devil's Minion, but a few other things as well):

I didn't like that ending with Daniel. At all. The point of fact is when I first saw that whole thing? I hated it. Viscerally.

And right now, the only thing that has calmed that feeling is knowing that we are getting a Season 3. And being willing to see what they do with this.

Because otherwise? This ending feels like the type of ending you'd get with a modern film remake of the 1994 movie. You know, with Lestat popping up in Daniel's car, indicating he was going to turn him? Which basically ignores that Devil's Minion is a thing. That happened.

This ending, in a lot of ways, feels like that one to me. And hey, back in 1994, before I read the books and knew Devil's Minion was a thing, that felt like a very satisfying ending.

But because I have read the books and do know about it? No. No, it wasn't.

This ending leaves way too much ambiguity. Purposefully, I can see that. But still. And I'm sorry, I'm just kind of not in the mood for that right now. Don't get me wrong, I get it. I get why they did it. But I'm just not in the mood for it. Especially when it comes to Devil's Minion.

But that is the peril of shipping the secondary couple in a story. They are the B (even C) plot in the overall scheme of things. This ending was about and for Louis. Bringing his character full circle to a place of healing and working on closure. And in that respect, the episode succeeded magnificently. I have zero issues or complaints.

But as far as my Devil's Minion-loving self goes? Again, the only thing that saves this for me as an ending wrt Daniel and Armand is knowing there is a Season 3 coming. Because if this had been all we got . . .

As a Devil's Minion fan since 1995, I did not wait all these years for this.

But, let me lay a few other things out about all of this to explain myself:

First yes, the setup for the chase having happened in the 70s is still there. That hasn't changed, even with this ending.

Because no, they are NOT going to do the Devil's Minion chase with Daniel already a vampire. Especially if Armand really did turn him. That makes no damn sense whatsoever. The whole point of the chase was that it turned into an elaborate courting ritual that gave time for Armand and Daniel to get to know each other. Armand chasing his own fledgling? After supposedly turning him out of spite?

No. Sorry. Not happening. That is not Devil's Minion in any way, shape, or form. The point was for Armand to fall in love with a human and Daniel to fall in love with a monster. For them both to see each other fully as they are in those ways, and fall for each other anyway. Not for Armand -- who loathes the very idea of turning someone -- to do it out of spite and then just abandon him -- or stalk him after he turn him and falls in love with him after that. Or for Daniel to in any way see Armand as having turned him out of spite.

And speaking of that:

Armand turning Daniel out of spite? Hell fucking no. That is, frankly, the opposite of how their relationship, and the turning of Daniel, go.

Armand abandoning Daniel after turning him? Hell fucking no. Armand only left Daniel after he was turned because Daniel wanted him gone. Daniel was the one who initiated the breakup (when you read Rice's Tulane notes about it).

And Daniel, even a Daniel who might be mad at Armand for turning, being that blasé about it all? Hell fucking no. Frankly, Daniel's whole attitude as a vampire was rubbing me the wrong freakin' way because it just didn't feel like him. Not to me.

Seriously. With the way this went down on its surface if you don't know the books, it would be very easy to think that Armand was flat-out lying when he said he'd never made another vampire before after you watch that reveal -- and hear that dialog -- about Daniel's turning. It was all so crass and cavalierly presented.

Which is why this whole thing reads as either a.) a DAMN BIG misunderstanding wrt what happened between Armand and Daniel, or b.) an excellent adaptation of the IWTV book but a terrible adaptation of Devil's Minion, or c.) that there is a whole truckload of context missing when it comes to that final scene.

And point-c goes into, for me at least, what the major thing that had me going "WTF is this?" about it all:

How is it that this show, which showed in this very episode mind you, (noting something from all the way back in Season 1 about Lestat not being able to talk to Louis via his mind in episode 1x02), that it keeps track of even the little details about things but . . . somehow gets Daniel's vampire eye color wrong?

Because yes, they did get it wrong. I rewatched the scene of the reveal of Daniel's eyes (specifically) three times now. And looked very carefully at them, Daniel's eyes start out as their normal human blue but then MORPH into a kind of yellowish-orange to denote that he's a vampire now. (And btw, since when can vampire's eyes do that!? Armand, at 500 years old, was wearing full-ass contact lenses to hide his vampire eyes. But Daniel, who's got to be at most 2 years old in vampire years, can morph/change his eye color at will? 😑)

Anyway. Is this show trying to tell me that they can change Louis' eyes to green when he becomes a vampire to homage to his book counterpart, but they don't know that Daniel's eyes are supposed to be violet? Something that is said directly about him right at the top of the Devil's Minion chapter? And is an eye color that Armand remarks about right before The Chase starts about how unusual it is?

No way. No way this show gets that detail wrong.

I said this in reply to someone a few weeks ago in a Direct Message after I made my predictions about Daniel getting turned, and I'm going to say it here: If Daniel's eye color isn't purple/violet, then the person turned is not Daniel. A body swap has already happened if that is the case, which is an argument I kind of already made in an ask I answered about a possible body swap here.

Because flat-out truth: we don't actually know if Armand tuned Daniel. We didn't see it. Louis didn't see it. You can't tell another vampire's maker just by looking at them. Daniel called Armand his Maker. Meaning, that is probably what Daniel told Louis. But we didn't see it.

And Daniel's eye color, what his vampire eye color should be, is completely wrong.

Yes, they very well could do something like a body swap off-screen. Because, hell, if this show had been canceled after Season 2, at least they got the main story, Louis' story, done. Going into things like body switching and all of that? Would have taken way too much time to explain and been a long-ass digression when they only had a short amount of time to wrap up that main story -- Louis' story.

Raglan James. Look, maybe Justin Kirk's character is Marius in truth, IDK. But right now? At this moment? I'm doubtful again. And that switching bodies comment he made in 2x06 of his was a "wink wink, nudge nudge" obvious thing to say (when it comes to books fans), but maybe that was the point. That it was too obvious and so we'd dismiss it. When it very much was going to happen. And now has.

The Talamasca being the one to publish the book -- which was confirmed that they did in this episode -- would have put Daniel in close proximity to James. For months.

So until we get Season 3 showing me Daniel (as Daniel) getting turned -- and by who -- I'm not believing that was Daniel at the end. Sorry, people can disagree with me on this, it's fine. But unless Rolin Jones himself flat-out says that was Daniel -- and not just in body but in mind/spirit /consciousness as well? I'm not going to believe it until I see his turning with my own eyes. Hopefully in Season 3. But I have a gut feeling I'm going to have to wait until Season 4. 😑

And look, I know many people do not want Daniel to be body-swapped. And so will probably resist everything I just said above about it very much being a possibility that already happened. And hey, maybe at the top of Season 3 when we see Daniel again (if we do) they'll change his eye color to violet, (or morph his eyes that color, IDK 🙄), and when we see the actual turning of Daniel we'll see that Armand didn't do it out of spite despite what Louis said about it happening right after he left Daniel alone with Armand (!!!), and they'll explain why Daniel is fine being on his own as a rouge vampire and still hates Armand and . . .

But right now? No. I'm not in the damn mood to try and make this work or make sense. I'm just not. Because it doesn't make any IMO. Not if you want to keep to the heart of what Daniel and Armand's love story is about.

And really. Daniel getting turned didn't bring his memories of the 1970s -- and yes the Devil's Minion chase with Armand -- back? Really?

Unless the show is honestly going to sit here and tell me that the chase didn't happen back then and so, therefore, Armand really did turn Daniel out of spite and not love?

Or is Armand now messing with Daniel's memories and blocking things from his mind now -- while keeping himself hidden from Daniel of course as he does so! Even though, as his Maker, accessing Daniel's mind like that wouldn't be very easy I should think.

Or, let me guess, the chase somehow did happen sometime between Louis throwing Armand into the wall and Daniel having the book published. Even though Daniel would have been in close contact and proximity to the Talamasca the whole damn time he was writing and editing the book in prep for it being published. Somehow, Daniel is supposed to find time to run around the world from Armand during all of that, without the Talamasca knowing about it? While he's in the middle of writing it? (Because Daniel only had recordings, remember? As he said himself in Episode 1x01, he still had to write it all up. Not to mention how Louis set Daniel's laptop on fire. Guess he kept a backup copy of the recordings in The Cloud.)

And that is all moot anyway, given what Louis said about when Daniel was (supposedly) turned. Daniel would have been a vampire during all of that since Armand supposedly turned Daniel during however long Louis left Daniel and Armand alone together in Dubai (!!!).

Does everyone see all the holes in all of this? Yet, this is a show that called back to episodes 1x02 and 1x03 about Lestat not being able to use the Mind Gift to talk to Louis, as well as what Lestat is capable of wrt his Mind Gift ability over humans. They set up the contradiction that put holes in Armand's story about the trial that far back. But somehow leave plot holes like this . . .?

To put it all bluntly, the minute I saw Danie's eyes -- and the way he changed their color like that, to that color? I think I actually recoiled. I recoiled at that whole damn scene. Because as far as the Devil's Minion storyline goes, the heart of it? That is not Devil's Minion. And I stand by that.

But hey, except for all of that wrt Devil's Minion, I actually liked the rest of the episode, for the most part. 🤷🏾‍♀️ Pretty much everything having to do with Louis and I really liked Loustat's reunion too. Though I might be missing something wrt it because it's clearly an adaptation of the contested meeting of them at the end of the IWTV book, but then . . . Louis goes back to Dubai to live after that? And I'm pretty sure he's alone and Lestat's not with him. Hmm. 🤔

The reveal of Armand doing what he did wrt the trial -- yeah, that's not all there is to it. We'll get major parts of the story from Lestat's POV next season, but we are not going to hear about the whole thing until we get Armand's POV. Because that little POV of the real trial that we saw was probably just Louis figuring things out about what happened. Not Armand's POV of it.

And which hey, to circle back to Daniel's turning again wrt Armand, this turning throws his character under the bus even more IMO, if any of what the show implied about it actually happened. Again, him even remotely turning Daniel so casually, out of spite, leaves open for a general audience that Armand is flat-out lying about having never turned anyone. Especially given the timing of when Louis implied Daniel was turned, which is right after he left them alone together in Dubai.

See, after the events of both IWTV and TVL, what Devil's Minion did and showed, even to Anne Rice herself, was that Armand wasn't just some manipulative little evil gremlin. That he actually did have a heart, deeply capable of love. Shown by his falling in love with a human. Again, that is a key point -- he fell for Daniel as a human. He turned Daniel because that love was deeper than his fear about making another vampire. And Armand only left Daniel after that turning when Daniel wanted him gone.

If you change that, then you change a massive point wrt Armand's growth and depth as a character. And, from the little info we got, that is very much what we see and have been told wrt Daniel's turning if any remote part of it was true. And, as I said, there really is no room to squeeze in things like a chase or Armand turning Daniel out of love. Not in my view at least, even everything I already laid out above about it.

I'm not in the mood to go into "maybe's" about all this right now. That is all just some hoop jumping I'm not in the mood to do at the moment.

Oh and I guess Daniel was the character who needed the second interview to happen? He was the one who needed it in 2x05 and Louis was the one who needed it in 2x08. Okay.

So yeah, as I said, as far as an adaptation of the first book goes, I really do think it was brilliant and excellently done. Espcially wrt Louis' story. The problem is, however, I know what the rest of the story is and where it goes. And that this all isn't over yet. And, unfortunately, I can't erase that from my head.

So in that regard, especially when it comes to the one storyline I never thought I'd ever see adapted? To say I'm frustrated is to put it mildly. Because if that really was Daniel, body and spirit/soul then I can't see myself ever liking how they adapted this version of Devil's Minion. Not right now. And they are going to have to go a long way to explain it and win me over to it if this is really the set place we're going with this is how Daniel was turned and him as a vampire -- if they can.

Sorry to end this on a kind of downer note. I will say, I'm not quitting the show over this or something. Right now I am open to see where they take this and if I'm correct about many of the things I've said or not. It's just I was never going to be able to see that ending in a vacuum wrt Devil's Minion . . . which I could wrt the 1994 because I saw it before I read the books.

So this is very likely an instance where non-book readers have an advantage over book readers in how they reacted to the Daniel part of that ending vs how I did. I can recognize that. And at least I don't feel like the show was insulting my intelligence with what they did. Not yet at least, as I can see where things have been left open to correct a LOT of stuff. I just wish I didn't have to wait through a hiatus wrt this to see where and how they are really going to take this. But at the very least, I think this hiatus will be shorter than the last one.

So yeah, again, as far as an adaptation of IWTV the book goes? Excellent. As far as the Devil's Minion storyline goes regarding Daniel's turning? No. Frustratingly incomplete when I look at it kindly but critically; and just a flat-out bad adaptation of it if I take all of that which we saw at face value.

[viensamoimoncher]

Sooooooooo...

I have a lil' theory about why Jacob is worried we'll dislike Louis at the end of this season (S2 discussion spoiler warning)

I think we're going to discover Claudia was the one warning Louis about the Théâtre coven, not the other way around

Louis won't listen to her fears about the coven or Armand, leading to her death just as it happened in the books

Then after Claudia is dead and gone and he is guilt-stricken in the aftermath, he has Armand alter his memories of the event

(Louis may or may not have known of Armand's involvement in her killing. Or at the least, he wasn't aware of the extent of it)

Currently in the show, Santiago is made out to be Claudia's Machiavellian murderer, and I see two possible reasons why:

1) being, Armand has painted Santiago as the villain to absolve himself of the blame

and 2) Louis, some time after Claudia's death / murder, aware as he is in the books that Armand led the charge against her, asks Armand to make him remember a different version of events

(given Jacob is worried how fans will feel about Louis post-s2, my money is on the latter)

In the book, Claudia (to my memory) was the one who was cautious about the Paris coven. She disliked how they went about what they did, the performance of it all. She didn't trust them at all

Just like Louis feels in the show

In the book, it was Louis who wanted to remain in Paris. Louis who didn't believe Armand or the coven were a danger to them. He was too intrigued, enamored even

Just like Claudia is with the coven

[pynkhues]

How different do you think the real Lestat actually is? I read Rolin said we’ve only seen 80% of him or something, and to me he did seem very different in 2022. But is that just because he’s depressed and grieving? It would make sense to me if they want to reveal to us what he’s really like given the way the first two books do that. But then again I think they tried to make him seem more like himself than he does in the first book already. I do hope for more nuance to his characterization though

I actually think we kind of got a sense of that in the trial episode, anon, not the real Lestat per se (after all, that was a heightened and controlled situation), but rather how the writers are planning on approaching him as we shift into Lestat's point of view.

What the trial did pretty masterfully was realise Lestat's perspective without undermining Louis'. Not once was Louis depicted as a liar - the bones of what happened were the same with both the drop and Claudia's turning - Lestat's perspective didn't take from Louis', what it did was add to it. It added nuance and context, heightened the emotion, and it showed us nothing of Louis that we didn't know was there, yet at the same time showed us a side that Louis himself would downplay, both his own capacity for violence and cruelty (which doesn't diminish Lestat's singular act of abuse), his selfishness and the lowest depths of his depression.

It's an unflattering picture, and it's not all of Louis - we know how much more he is than that - but it is him too, and in a lot of ways, that's been what we've experienced in reverse. Louis' perspective of Lestat is him, it's his tendency to suffocate, bait, control, hurt, but just like the Louis of 2.07 is not all of Louis, the Lestat of Louis' recollections isn't all of Lestat either. In that sense, I don't expect Lestat to be different from Louis' depiction of him so much as I just think he's going to be more - more complicated, more emotional, more loving, more temperamental, more prone to impulsivity, more desperately, earnestly lonely.

So yeah, I think you're going to get your hope for more nuance. :-)

[indelicateink]

Hi I love reading your tags on iwtv post! What would make season 2 perfect in your eyes re: louis/armand/lestat?

thanks! (i'm taking that as in general, lmk if I misunderstood/there's one in particular that pertains to your question.)

i need s2 to be fucked-up-shit o'clock on our fucked-up-shit show (affectionate). my total emotional annihilation would make it perfect for me re: our guys.

armand has done some seriously naughty shit that's going to put a major dent in their lives for the next century, and i'm hopeful we get to explore that in a no-holds-barred dicks-out blood-tears abject-humiliation existential-horror love letter to the fans.

i want sam reid to get to have the juiciest time portraying the agonizing devastation that is visited upon lestat this season (affectionate)

i want assad zaman to seduce us utterly with armand's beauty and outrageous horror (affectionate)

i want jacob anderson to melt our fucking minds as louis goes through the most traumatizing events of his life (concerned)

that would be perfect for me, for them

[blueiight]

Coming slowly to know his evil, or being catapulted into it ... was all the same. I wanted none of it finally. And, deserving nothing better, I closed up like a spider in the flame of a match. And even Armand who was my constant companion, and my only companion, existed at a great distance from me, beyond that veil which separated me from all living things, a veil which was a form of shroud. (IWTV, 1976)

[alwynwitch]

The Talamasca in AMC IWTV: Raglan, Marius, Daniel, Rashid and Sam

Earlier I wrote a post (and an older one) about why I think Raglan James is actually Marius de Romanus or he is Raglan but sent by his superior Marius. @romaroy also made an excellent post about this (and I know @nalyra-dreaming and @chicalepidopterareblogs talked about this theory as well). Now we know vampire Sam Barclay was also working with the Talamasca and I'm connecting the dots.

In summary, in the books the Talamasca is secretly founded by vampire Teskhamen and two spirits. They are the secret elders, guiding it. I think in the show Marius will have this role. And he is already present in the story and watching Armand with the help of Sam and Rashid. There are visual clues that Rashid is actually working for Marius (the painting). Marius probably helped publishing Daniel's memoir (at Roman Weiss Publishing House) and maybe the book Interview with the Vampire.

I will elaborate on these points under the cut.

1) The Talamasca is founded by vampires and spirits and led by them as secret elders

So, in the books vampire Teskhamen and spirits are the secret founders and elders of the Talamasca, who are leading them from the background (without the humans knowing). I think the same will be true in the AMC show, because it is shown that Sam, a vampire, is working with them. This is what Prince Lestat and the Realms of Atlantis says about how vampire Teskhamen is leading them:

"The Order is stable now, quite harmless to you. But we've never stopped watching over them. [...] We know everything. We watch them as they watch the supernatural phenomena of the world. [...] When it comes time for the Talamasca to die, we will dispatch it."

So, the humans who watch the vampires are not the ones in charge, the vampire who is secretly leading them is. 3D-chess game! They guide the humans who watch the vampires:

"They are pitiful mortals, simple mortals, honest mortals, scholars and nothing more. [...] We are guiding them. I told you."

Who is Teskhamen? He is the maker of Marius. And the other founder? Gremt, a spirit who follows spirit Amel (who started the vampire race by going into Akasha) to earth. There he meets Pandora who gives him her philosophical vision that becomes the mission of the Talamasca. Who is Pandora? Marius's first fledgling and his great love.

And the reason why the Talamasca is founded? It is heavily motivated by watching the spirit Amel who is in Akasha. So basically, to watch Those Who Must Be Kept. They are already mentioned several times in the show... (just as the Great Conversion, which is also connected to this!) and Marius is their Keeper. Which leads to...

2) Speculation: in the AMC show Marius will be the secret founder/elder of the Talamasca

Character-wise it makes a lot of sense. The AMC show is very much character-driven and the books have simply too many characters to flesh them all out. Teskhamen is not fleshed out well in the books. So it makes sense to give Marius this role. (And hopefully, Pandora can have a role as well!)

Marius is known not only for being a nerd, bookish and scholarly, but also for spying on others and invading their privacy and boundaries. When Marius is introduced for the first time, in The Vampire Lestat, he tells Lestat he knows every detail of his life and has been spying on him:

"How do you know what's been happening to me?" I asked. Again, he smiled. He almost laughed.

"I know things that happen to our kind all over the world. [...] There are moments when I can hear what is happening with our kind in Rome or even in Paris. And when another calls to me as you have done, I can hear the call over amazing distances."

"And I've heard of you from others. And sometimes you and I have been near to each other – nearer than you ever supposed – and I have heard your thoughts."

"Then you know all that, too." "Yes, everything," he said, dismissing that.

And in his own book Blood and Gold Marius says he is also spying on Armand:

For though I had spied upon Amadeo more than once, I saw nothing in him, but the same heartbreaking sadness that I had known in Venice. 

Yeah, Marius is a Total Creep. And guess who else is creepy? The Talamasca. Their motto is: We watch and we are always there. Marius would fit perfectly with them. He could have placed agents Sam and Rashid near Armand. Big Marius is watching you.

3) The role of Marius and the Talamasca by Daniel's books

Raglan James (Marius?) told Daniel that the Talamasca can publish his book but other publishers would reject it. At the end of 2x08 we see this happening. Daniel's book is published by the Talamasca. And Daniel complains they have been heavily editing it. Why? I think because they want to control the narrative about what will be publicly known about vampires.

Has this happened before? Yes! Daniel's first memoir was published by Roman Weiss Publishing House. Roman Weiss seems to refer to Marius. And the memoir is heavily connected to Daniel's memory loss regarding Armand and Louis. So this is an important clue that not only Daniel and Marius have met before, but also that Marius and his publishing activities are connected to the Talamasca. Because Marius is the secret founder/elder? I think so!

[avelera]

I saw the IWTV finale early thanks to a kind soul sharing it with me!

A few (spoiler-y) thoughts:

Really interesting how they reimagined and framed the ending of this take on IWTV with Louis and Lestat mourning Claudia together. It feels like Justice For Claudia in many ways, it feels like a fitting homage to the origins of Claudia's character (the dead of Anne Rice's daughter from leukemia as a child), and in general was just a really interesting way to sort of give this closure the book never did and also use it to realistically allow them both to push forward past their toxic and abuse past into a somewhat plausible healed future.

It was also a decent reminder, to me, that these are vampires. These characters live forever. I would not condone Louis/Lestat in real life because life is too short to keep going back to an abusive ex. But these guys are vampires. Do not do as they do. But genuinely 70 years, a human lifetime, is realistically long enough to say, "Hey, we're new people now, we've learned and suffered a lot, we lost our daughter and it was fucked up. Maybe all we have is each other." And make peace with each other on that front.

BUT NOW I'M WONDERING HOW WE GET ROCKSTAR LESTAT - ok because Louis kind of got Lestat's book motivation for becoming a rockstar? The "Fuck you, come find me," to all the other vampires. Lestat I believe only speculates that as Louis' motivation, but they made it canon (or I could be wrong).

But that was Lestat's motivation for HIS book, making Louis and the others come find him. Since that's been solved with Louis coming to find him (lovely little homage to the IWTV movie with him playing the harpsichord) now I'm wondering if Louis is the one who encourages Lestat to become a rockstar and write down his book.

Thing is, it's not totally contradicted by the book. (SPOILERS) TVL does end with a beat where Louis and Lestat reunite and Louis is kind of his groupie for a bit. Moving that up so Louis is part of Lestat's rise is actually a really lovely touch, it gives them a bit more time together before shit goes down, and I could totally see this version of Louis as Lestat's agent since he's shown to have that business acumen.

Now that Daniel is a vampire (OMG OMG OMG MORE ON THAT IN A SECOND) the risk is no longer so bad for him to come interview Lestat and I'm sure he's salivating to do so and Louis would definitely invite Vampire Daniel to do the interview for Lestat's book, since there's no fear for his safety (or at least, not as much) anymore. And Daniel would jump at the chance. It would be a fabulous framing device, Rockstar Lestat with his agent, Louis, inviting Daniel to interview Lestat for his next book AND it means we get Daniel's snark throughout Lestat's story.

OK SO DANIEL BEING A VAMPIRE. Definitely leaves the door open for past AND present Devil's Minion WITH THE ADDED BONUS of Daniel not going insane after he's turned (likely owed to not being turned while still a drug addled young man so, hey, if there was past Devil's Minion where Armand said no, kudos to him for reading the situation correctly that vampirism would drive young Daniel insane but not Old Man Daniel).

I was SLIGHTLY, SLIGHTLY bummed to see Daniel as a vampire without getting to see the whole Daniel/Armand situation but only slightly. There wasn't enough room in the season, it would have been a distraction, and IMO we can now save it properly for its place in either TVL or QOTD, which I bet are going to be Seasons 3-4 or as many as 3-6 if we stick to 2 seasons per book.

A take on Devil's Minion where past and present Devil's Minion are intertwined would be AMAZING and I've got my fingers crossed that's how they do it. Maybe interweave a bit of Vampire Armand.

I don't think/know if we're going to get a full Vampire Armand season BUT I do believe the show is going to pivot its POV lens to say, hey, everyone's got a point of view, everyone's got a reason. At some point, we're going to get more of Armand's POV and why he did what he did because I imagine his version will be different from Louis', just as Lestat's is, that's the whole basis of the show. And in there maybe we'll get some past Daniel/Armand.

Ok this already got away from me but ANYWAY, those are my thoughts for now.

[thebrokenpapergirl]

IWTV S2-E3 Spoilers

This post is about Daniel and Raglan James. (It will also contain some book spoilers, as I have speculations).

Send Raglan James straight to Hell!!!

FUCK! THIS! BITCH!

I think this motherfucker is already running from the Talamasca. But being the opportunistic bitch that he is, and seeing as he wants to hijack a powerful vampire body, he's trying to use Daniel in order to have access.

Armand would be his preferred target as the oldest, but Louis is not a bad choice either. Raglan wants to speedrun vampirism and have all the power, but none of the passage of time required to achieve it.

(Yes, I do know in the books he chooses Lestat, but they might change that in the show. Or simply have Raglan fail first with Armand and Louis and then go after Lestat.)

He could, very well, try to switch bodies with Daniel first. The Talamasca get psychic training he could pretend to be Daniel, whilst hiding his thoughts.

He's probably gonna try and sell Daniel some bullshit on how much danger he is actually in, or come up with some other story, and because he has access to the Talamasca's archives he will know quite a bit more about Daniel's past than Daniel himself. He, also, has a lot of information that might contradict what is said in the interview, because the Talamasca have substantial knowledge on Louis, Armand, Claudia and Lestat. This will make him seem trustworthy.

The things is, irregardless of Raglan's plans, he just painted a giant target on Daniel's back by giving him access to the Talamasca's archives. He's covering his tracks, because the Talamasca will have to deal with Daniel and what he now possesses, all the while giving Raglan a better chance at slipping through the cracks. He, also, just put Armand and Louis at risk of having to fight off the Talamasca by themselves!!!!

If the Talamasca think Armand and Louis have insider knowledge of their organization they will act.

This motherfucker is the fucking worst.

I swear to God, if the twist in Episode 8 is the Talamasca showing up at the penthouse guns blazing...

I'm going to need Raglan to be very dead and dismembered by the end of season 3.

[cbrownjc]

Hmm. On the one hand, I have to admit I’m a bit surprised that Lestat would tell everything directly to Louis, as I thought he would tell it to Daniel because Louis would be recovering from trying to take his own life (and dealing with Claudia’s spirit probably) in Season 3, while Lestat told his story to Daniel concurrent with that. 

But Lestat and Louis actually sitting down and talking to each other? Wow, took you two over 100 years to get there, but if this is true, then yes, thank goodness. It'll be something long overdue.  

And hell, Lestat - in the books - primarily wrote The Vampire Lestat to give info he held back from Louis, and to explain himself to Louis as well. So it would fit wrt that too.

Though, if this is true, I kinda wonder if we will get the Merrick ending in Season 2. Louis was rather angry at Lestat for saving his life after the Merrick event. However . . . maybe they’ll change that and Louis will already be recovered enough to sit and really listen to Lestat’s story. (Which will also mean no present-day Claudia in any form in Season 3, only flashbacks probably.) 

And I still don’t see Daniel being turned into a vampire at the end of Season 2. It’s still too soon IMO. Meaning that Daniel sticking around in Dubai probably gives some credence to the theory that Daniel was brought there to Dubai mainly for Armand IMO. And Armand’s not letting Daniel leave again if he can help it IMO. 

And Daniel probably will find himself wanting to stay in Dubai anyway, to at least confront Armand/try to fully remember what happened back in the 70s-early 80s between them, which does fit with my idea/theory that we’d get full-blown Devil’s Minion flashbacks in Season 3.

So what we might have in Season 3 is both primary pairings mainly talking to each other and hashing things out (finally): Louis-Lestat together, talking about and learning things i.e., Louis finally hearing Lestat’s full story; and Armand-Daniel off in another part of the penthouse doing the same wrt each other and the whole past-Devil’s Minion situation. Maybe even Armand’s telling Daniel some of his backstory that we might not get in Season 2.

Again, this is all assuming this rumor is true of course. 

The user on Twitter is luvwHK. She said that Sam is filming the scenes where he recovers after the murder and that he is preparing to leave for Prague. She also said that they still don't know how he will tell his story in s3 but they are thinking about Lestat telling it to Louis face to face and that Sam agrees with this version. Please if you read the thread on Twitter can you come back and tell what you think about it? Thanks!

Hey, thx, found it (also thx to @crazykuroneko for dropping me the link at the same time 🤗💕)

Well.

So the rat eating, preying on the weak or young is chronologically in IWTV, even if it is told by Lestat in TVL. So that does not necessarily mean we get Lestat’s story, imho.

But it is interesting, because it might be something that Armand later tells … because Armand would know (afterwards).

And as per the season 3 rumor … well.

I SURE HOPE THEY DO THAT 😅

Yes please. With Armand and Daniel there, too. That would be my favorite thing ever 😅😈

[time-lord-hilarious]

A random IWTV speculation but has Armand been trying to erase traces of his existence from the human world after a certain point in history?

Claudia’s diaries have his name specifically removes, he and Louis seem to have collected remaining theatre pamphlets (a theatre that’s fully burnt down at that). Daniel’s memory seems to be altered to forget specifically Armand - the dream about Mary’s cuts off directly before he steps in, and Louis seems to be amused by this fact. When Daniel states “you were there” after Armand reveals himself Louis asks “you don’t remember, do you?” which is something that’s been plenty established. The tapes shipped to Daniel have absolutely no trace of his presence, but we see him turning on the recorder in season 2 preview that aired after 2x01 (did he make a separate tape with his voice on it that they didn’t share with Daniel at all, tucked away somewhere in the safety of their house, not to be given to Daniel or any third party to get it to NYC to him?)

Now I know that all of these could have different explanations. 

Louis and Armand could’ve made an agreement to remove the pages for a great number of reasons. After all even if Louis does not realise the nature of Armand’s involvement in Claudia’s death she made it known to him that she felt abandoned because of Armand, so maybe it was necessary to remove them to keep their love and relationship going and get past that for the sake of Louis’ sanity. Daniel thing could easily be Armand deeply traumatising him on the night of the first interview where it would be needed to additionally permanently remove Armand  from his memory as an entity separate from the interview, and/or a memory wipe of some rendition of a DM scenario. Theatre pamphlets could be a mere archiving effort regarding Armand’s long life. The tapes with Armand’s voice on it might not be relevant to Louis’ story.

But I still thing it’s interesting that Louis is more public with his name, putting it on cards in 70s, presumably transportation and other bills, post shipping etc. And Armand used a specific person as a disguise instead of introducing himself as servant Armand or devising a new persona. Louis also tried and failed to stop him from revealing himself. 

So I really wonder if this could potentially have something to do with the Talamasca too.

Also this would make him going on the record for the interview very dangerous.

[cbrownjc]

hi! i had some questions for you as someone who only got into iwtv post season 1 of the show starting to air. i read from some of your other posts that you've been a fan since the 90s, and you mentioned how DM fans were disappointed post TVA. so i was wondering, what was the fandom like back then? did people mostly write about the chase/human!daniel era, or did people ever try to write fanfics that continued their story with them still together as vampires despite what anne rice decided on? i know what the trends were like on ao3 (i got obsessed with DM before season 1 even finished airing, i read the books that fast) but i was wondering if it looked different at all back then (pre-ao3). secondly, i was also wondering if most people ignored the "no sex" element of canon and included sex scenes in their fanworks, or if most of the work you saw was more at the canon level of erotica/blood drinking level? it's okay if you don't really remember, i'm just curious about fandom trends. the tidbit about the "boss" thing being fanon since the 90s despite it only being said once was very amusing to me (i noticed that myself haha)

Hello! Sorry for just getting to your question today, real-life things, and all that. 🙂

So, from what I remember from back then, (from the mid-90s to the early 2000s), at least from when fanfic was still not banned yet (😉) is that when it came to Devil's Minion, fanfic did have a mix of people writing things were Daniel was still human and people speculating on what Daniel and Armand's relationship was like after Queen of the Damned and Daniel had been turned. But I would say the Devil's Minion era -- when Daniel was still human -- was much more focused on a bit more since, at that point, there were only four books out, and not too much time had passed between book 3 and book 4. And because the Devil's Minion Era lasted 12 years in total there were at least more situations and ideas that were easier to get ideas to write about.

When it came to post-Daniel being turned, before The Vampire Armand came out, there just wasn't much of anything to go on. So it really was just speculation galore on that front, but there wasn't all that much to solidly speculate on.

At least until Armand seemingly killed himself at the end of Memnoch the Devil. Then I remember a lot of angsty Daniel-focus stories during that time after that happened. Or, angry fix-it fic because there was a very vocal group who kept arguing that Armand killing himself over what he did was just wildly OOC in the first place.

As to the "no sex" thing, there were some who very strictly followed it and those who, IIRC, would put a disclaimer at the start of stories stating that the characters would have physical sex in the story. Stories that had physical sex scenes between characters still tended to have the character still do blood drinking too, however.

In remembering things from back then, however, I'd say more people leaned into the "no sex" thing more than they did the characters having physical sex . . . even after The Vampire Armand book came out. Because even with the things that happened of a sexual nature in that book, there was a hot debate about if what went on between Armand and Marius, and Armand/Marius/Bianca really counted as sex or not. And most people fell on the "it wasn't sex" side of things about all of that.

In fact, I remember a long email chain post in my mailing list after that book came out arguing about this and someone even adding it to the FAQ for the mailing list that no, it did NOT count as sex because as a vampire, Marius wouldn't have/didn't get aroused or use his genitalia during the moment between himself and Armand in the bath; and then again with Bianca neither Armand nor Marius could have gotten aroused in that way because they were vampires, despite Bianca getting pleasure during that encounter because she was still human at the time; so it didn't matter that Marius used his finger on her and whatever, vampires still couldn't have sex.

No there were not a lot of human AU stories back then, not even to get around the "no sex" thing wrt canon back then either. People either stuck to the blood-drinking as erotic or, again, put disclaimers at the start to say the characters were having physical sex. That was it.

[i-want-my-iwtv]

I recently watched iwtv and I’m wondering if yvette is featured in the book ? I took to her for some reason and wanted to know if there’s more information about her.

I really enjoyed Yvette, too! No, she's not in the book. BUT, bc Anne Rice wrote the script for the '94 movie, Yvette is somewhat canonized from that ;)

If you want some speculative fiction about Yvette, @wicked-felina and I included her in our coffeeshop AU Signature Blend (which was mentioned by the Daily Dot!), we gave her some more screen time as a baker in San Francisco, and as a dear friend of Louis, delivering her New Orleans-style baked goods to his coffee shop in SF. She’s been in some other fanfic, too, but I couldn't compile all the instances, I don't remember!

^This bridal carry and the change in the story to him burning his house down bc he gave into the temptation of killing someone he appeared to genuinely love?? Chef's kiss. In canon, this is the night Louis has to kill Lestat's father; cutting out that character needed something of impact (but would take less time storytelling-wise) to stitch in as a replacement. In my opinion, this is an example of a change made to canon that gave the story a different flavor that was intellectually stimulating and emotionally stunning... some might say it's an improvement to canon. If not an improvement, I would say it's an intriguing divergence that added a different and thought-provoking alternative direction. And the metaphor of him doing the bridal carry to return her to her community! It's echoed later on with Armand killing the girl on stage at the Theatre des Vampires. Plus, Yvette looked beautiful! In the '94 movie, Louis essentially puts 2 wives in their graves (you could say 3 if you include Madeleine!), no wonder he's Done with everything after he's just killed Yvette.

Also, there’s fanon that Louis and Yvette grew up together, that they were childhood friends, or maybe even raised as siblings. So maybe Anne had a similar idea when she wrote that caring character into the script, and since she (and/or Neil Jordan) removed both of Louis' canon siblings (with whom he had been close) and his mother.

And! Brad Pitt and Thandie Newton (Yvette) were dating during the filming of IWTV, I feel like that added to their on-screen chemistry.

[pynkhues]

My thought for the whole Armand as a liar/one dimensional villain conundrum was kind of like this-

I feel like contrasting his actions in TVL as Lestat tells them with Daniel maybe remembering details from past with Armand where Armand is very genuine and emotional with him might be a fun juxtaposition. That would be an interesting arc for Daniel as well, and make him really get pulled into the ethical quandaries of vampire relationships. And maybe it mirrors a little what Louis has been through recalling Lestat and the good and bad.

I could also kind of see there being some greater machinations around some of Armand’s actions (like what is going on with the talamasca’s involvement, the trial script, vampire Sam, etc) that could maybe take a little of the straight up villainy off of Armand’s plate. But that is purely speculation

That would be an interesting way to do it, anon! I'm genuinely curious as to what Armand's modern arc is going to be in general in s3 because I do feel we've got a relatively clear sense of at least what the set-up of the others' arcs are going to be knowing that Daniel's interviewing Lestat and Louis' likely to end up on at least part of the tour. We don't even know where Armand is at the end of s2, let alone how he's going to interact with the plot.

But yes! The Talamasca / Vampire Sam stuff does make me wonder how deep we're going to go into the Children of Satan, rival coven histories next season, which would be an interesting area to explore too.

[alchely]

I'm having such a great time watching Interview with the Vampire and coming here with people speculating based on the books regarding how the story will unfold. Then every once in a while I come across someone who has a stick up their ass about how the TV series is deviating from the source material and I really just wanna put a hand on their shoulder and go like "dude, breathe".

IWTV is a GREAT story and an even better TV show, be grateful that so many people whose only experience with this story will be this adaptation (ppl like me, I have never and likely will never even watch the movie) are watching something so high quality to learn about your beloved characters.

I had these same nitpicky thoughts when the One Piece Live Action came out, but over time I had to come to terms with two things-

One: ppl who had never and will never read the source material really liked the story despite the minor plot holes and slight inaccuracies the adaptation had created that "were better explained in the original".

Two: the adaptation was good in every way that counts, it kept the soul of the original work, kept all the major plot points and themes.

Y'all should really get off your high horses