#which is. actually very armand.

[dykesynthezoid]

“Armand should get to just kill Marius” tbh if Armand ever killed Marius he would pull a Sada Abe. Who said that

[divorceblogger]

I feel like I’d get the anne hate train better if people hated her for the right reasons and didn’t sideline the actual genius of her work in the process. also who gives a fuck if she was living vicariously through her characters. male writers do that all the time too.

[dxxtruction]

"You think I need to be coddled, hyped up, lied to?"

This could be taken a few ways obviously but one of them is that these are things Louis does for Armand because he needs them. And he probably throws this out because he knows Armand well enough to know he has a habit of assuming others think and want exactly the same things as him. If the interview wasn't a clear example Armand's too insecure - about himself and their relationship - to just sit with the harder truth, or take the truth from others. Vulnerability is very hard for him. Him revealing himself at all at the end of season 1 is based on an assumption of his that Louis is the same way. That Louis needs, or wants, exactly what he needs, or wants. That Daniel should be ashamed of mocking Louis pain, because he wouldn't want that for his own. (And to an extent that's not a terrible assumption, but to override Louis own feelings on it, when he wants to be confronted with the hard truth even if it is in a mocking way, it is kind of ... yeah.)

To explain this? He's adapted so much to what others want and need of him to be, he probably still thinks he's adapting to it, or needs to, so doesn't quite get these aren't his own wants and needs being expressed. He does a lot of projecting, and also, by caring for Louis he almost lives vicariously through him as sort of a measure for his own self worth. (This can be incredibly suffocating.) Armand does a lot of based on assumption thinking, and I want to say this stems from a disorganized attachment. With uncertain caregivers you have to be prepared for everything changing at a moments notice. So, will need to make assumptions and future predictions to protect yourself from that uncertainty.

But anyway like, if he's not coddled in those, seen perhaps more favorably than he deserves, and more over, allowed to think a lie for the both of them, its at which point it's him who acts out given how insecure in himself he is. If torturing Daniel isn't a clear enough example. And I think Louis tries to indulge this because he sort of understands Armand's just very broken and feeding his insecurities unnecessarily isn't going to help much. He knows Armand was always around for him, and stuck by whenever is was him acting out instead (Even if Armand was always at the root of why he ever was acting out). Max level of empathy Louis strikes again. But draw a line where a line needs to be drawn. Louis will just not compromise for Armand on everything, and will not accept a flat out lie being told if he's not also in on it.

They both know this relationship, by all means, was not supposed to ever work. And the fact they tried at all is almost a lie in itself. A tell yourself something till it's true, situation. But in this instance it can't ever become true, because one or both of you can't actually let it or get to that point honestly.

[pureseasalt]

(holding the mic with trembling hands) iwtv s2e8 was peak tv season ender actually

[pynkhues]

Do you think Louis was being truthful when he told Daniel that ‘Paris was the more formative sexual liberation’ for him? I can’t remember the exact episode, but it struck me as though he was comparing it to his experiences with Lestat. On the one hand, I feel as though there is an attitude that anything Louis did outside his relationship with Lestat is void in some way or that he must be fooling himself/brainwashed into thinking that. On the other, I think his relationship with Lestat was also very important in that regard.

Yeah, I do think he's being truthful about it, anon, because I don't really interpret that line to be about individual sexual experiences so much as his experience of his sexuality broadly. Louis' both repressed and oppressed in New Orleans, he has a stifling amount of baggage around his sexuality from the church to his family to the fact that he's living in the racist, homophobic, Southern American town that he grew up in having to cut and contort himself into a shape that allows him to survive. He and Lestat are married for 30 years, and that relationship is, of course, enormously important to Louis, but they're still living that relationship as a secret (albeit as an open secret) until that final night when Louis kisses him on the dance floor before he kills (then saves) him.

A kiss that, as Louis tells us explicitly, is treated as the only sin from that night too depraved to print, a relationship that the true crime tour in the s2 finale reminds us is considered less likely than Claudia having been his child bride instead of his daughter. It's been a century, and New Orleans still won't acknowledge that Louis was gay, let alone what he and Lestat and Claudia were to each other (at least not before Daniel's book).

In Paris, Louis is free from all those constraints on his sexuality. He's disconnected from the church, his family is gone, and he's outside of the American south in an environment that lets him live a life as a gay, Black man more openly. There's absolutely sexual liberation in that that has nothing to do with his relationships with either Lestat or Armand. It's about having the freedom to be able to step into your own sexuality and live it openly instead of hiding it. In that sense, I do think Paris was probably the most formative for the Louis we meet in Dubai in 2022, and was more healing to his sense of self-acceptance than New Orleans could ever have been, regardless of Lestat, because it didn't matter how much they loved each other, the town would not acknowledge them.

He got to live with himself, as himself publicly in Paris, and Armand might not have been the great love of his life, but he was a love that Louis got to claim publicly in a way that he was never allowed to with Lestat in New Orleans. That's significant on so many levels, and, to me at least, is part of the tragedy of their Rue Royale era. I think Paris taught Louis that it's time and places that change things, not love, which speaks to the overall themes of the adaptation - memory is a monster, but time is a gift, and Paris in the 40s gave Louis his first chance at self-acceptance in a way that New Orleans in the 10s could not.

[mariocki]

The Nesting (Massacre Mansion, 1981)

"It may come as a surprise to you that a physicist could even contemplate the existence of paranormal phenomena."

"But you admit to the possibility."

"I admit the possibility of the unknown. I admit that science is only beginning to understand its own discoveries. But I do not believe in evil spirits or painted phantoms in windows."

[ayda-agueforts]

one week out and personally I think it would’ve been more compelling if armand had directed the play AND saved louis bc it would give armand more agency and loumand more complexity and still wouldn’t change the fact that armand built the last 50 years of his and louis’ relationship on a lie but maybe that’s just me

[laniidae-passerine]

people think the theories are getting too crazy well I don’t think we’re getting crazy enough. we need weirder shit. Armand wasn’t Alice. Louis was Alice. how does that work? it doesn’t. but it’s only Tuesday and I can’t day drink rn so we’re gonna work with this until the weekend

[camellia-thea]

initially this post had some commentary about interests right now. and then it turned into a ramble about personal healing in the tags. so the interest post is going separately.

[hekateinhell]

stepped back in time today when one of my aunt's senior citizen friends asked me—in all seriousness—if my friend liking vampires means she worships the devil as well

but the segue to that question was: "is she, you know, weird?"

which, ma'am... I am not the best authority on Weird™️

[audible-smiles]

My memory of The Birdcage (1996) is always that it's more dated and more difficult to watch than it actually is. You hear "drag-themed comedy from the 90s based on a musical from the 80s based on a play from the 70s" and you brace yourself just a little, right? But the film has a strong gay perspective, so the fruity fag jokes mostly come off as warmly affectionate. There is a surprising amount of poignancy in Robin Williams' portrayal of Armand, grudgingly agreeing to his beloved son's request that he go back into the closet for an evening ("do me a favor and don't talk to me for a while"). The drag club's staff attempting to redecorate the apartment with stuff straight people might like (a taxidermy moose head, an enormous crucifix, and Playboy magazine) is extremely funny. Albert's histrionics are a point of tension because he does often come off as a stereotypically pathetic/comic figure, but towards the end of the movie he makes it very clear that he's aware of how people see him, and asserts that trying to copy a stoic masculinity he doesn't possess for the sake of social approval would be more pathetic. In the 1983 musical adaptation, they give "Albert" (Albin) the only good song in the whole show, "I Am What I Am", which Gloria Gaynor covered to the delight of gays everywhere. Apparently Nathan Lane wasn't (publicly) out yet in 1996, which is amazing because it means that at one point in this movie you're watching a gay man playing a straight man playing a gay man playing a straight man, in a movie about how it's important to be yourself, an absurdity that does seem to encapsulate the state of gay America in the 90s.

[zoe-oneesama]

The Kwamis! Some of these came easier than others, but since Angelic Layer has no magic involved, all the kwamis became human~ They won't be very prevalent, they're mostly here to fill in background character roles - shop clerks, MCs Tournament Directors, fans - so they won't have a whole lot of speaking roles (aside from, you know, the MCs who're there to commentate on the fights lol). But I thought I'd give them all a nice nod in the story somewhere.

As expected, Tikki and Plagg are the main MCs. Marinette and Adrien's fights will be going on concurrently so Tikki will be commentating Marinette's fights while Plagg commentates on Adrien's. They'll have the most dialogue of the kwamis, so I do want them to have unique ways of discussing what they're seeing.

Pollen will be working directly for the Bourgeois'. As a VIP with a direct relationship with the international director of Angelic Layer, Chloe has her own private practice layer in her home and Pollen is in charge of it's upkeep and maintenance. She matches Armand the Bulter's levels of competence.

Trixx is a Rena Rouge mega fan. They've been following Alya's blog for as long as they can remember and are mega stoked that Alya moved to their city. When Alya starts to doubt herself, it's Trixx's voice that can be heard cheering her on to not give up.

Nooroo and Duusu are servants in the Agreste Estate. Unknown to Adrien, they are fully aware of his sneaking around to play and the two do what they can to make excuses and deflect Nathalie when Adrien isn't where he's supposed to be. They're rooting him on from the shadows!

Wayzz is the adult son of Marianne and Fu. He brings them to Angelic Layer fights against his will because the two really enjoy them. The two seem to be really invested in Ladybug and Chat Noir's career (and the behind the scenes shenanigans that they secretly spy on).

Longg is Kagami's bodyguard. Like Nooroo and Duusu, they are fully aware of what Kagami is doing behind her mother's back and feigns ignorance when Kagami pulls something..."sneaky" to get to a fight secretly.

Here's where we get into some existing jobs from the show:

Orikko and Kaalki are the "Layer Hot Girls (and boy)". lol I just thought it was funny that Angelic Layer even has them.

Mullo is the sales clerk at the Princess Piffle store (the store where you can buy your Angel and all the accessories). All of them lol. Mullo and her many many sisters who look just like her.

Barkk and Fluff take similar but still different roles (the uniforms are ALMOST the same but there are some tiny differences). So Barkk is the receptionist at the Practice Ring (literally you pay to reserve a mini-layer to practice on) while Fluff is the waitress/cashier at the cafeteria at the Tournament Center.

(and back to making shit up lol)

Daizzi is a nurse where Rose goes to the hospital and she has segmental localized vitiligo. Rose is particularly close to Daizzi since she helps Rose make her donations to the hospital.

Sass is the backstage directory, aka, the guy who makes things run. He has an earpiece that has the same diamond pattern as his pants on it! The anime does show one person who helps backstage, but I wanted to have a little fun with Sass's look and tie in to him being "in charge" of the kwamis.

Ziggy works at Socqueline's family art supply shop, which is frequented by Angelic Layer players who are on a bit of a budget. They love talking with the customers about their angels, though mostly the design part.

Stompp is Ivan's foster mother and Roarr his foster sister (Stompp's bio-daughter). I actually didn't think of what kind of job this outfit would be good for, but I think she'd make a good security guard - usually working at rock concerts, which she bonds with Ivan over, but she's also been hired for Angelic Layer tournaments. Sometimes sore losers get a little...violent.

Roarr falls in love with Juleka's Angel Purple Tigress immediately thanks to her pre-existing love of tigers in general. She's even bold enough to proclaim her love to Juleka herself!

Xuppu is Ondine's sibling and a fan of King Monkey, though they'll go out of their way to make fun of Kim himself. Secretly, they're very invested in Kim's career and get very upset on his behalf when he loses.

[pynkhues]

Poor Lestat laying in fetal position, looking so small and having dead eyes :( Armand saying he's come home was so creepy, wtf was he thinking. You know, this scene just doesn't make any sense to me, why would Lestat go out of his own will to a place that's the biggest ptsd trigger you can imagine. To punish himself I guess? Sometimes it feels like Rolin wants Lestat to have so much agency that he never allows him to be a victim. Kinda worried how they'll handle s3 wrt this. I hope they won't victim blame him for every bad thing that happened to him because 'he deserved it'.

Oh, anon, I'm sorry because this is probably not what you want to hear, but I love that Armand said that Lestat's come home by going back to the place he was turned and assaulted, because it feels really emotionally honest and true to these characters.

Claudia, Armand and Lestat are all victim-survivors, and I think the show's demonstrated that it's really curious as to what that means.

There's a school of thought that's currently becoming more understood in feminist circles that victim-survivors can often not believe each other, or diminish each other's experiences. The nature of the sort of abuse that Claudia, Armand and Lestat have all experienced is that they've had to process it to a point where they feel they are the expert of their story. They know what happeend to them, they've gone through a lot to know what happened to them, and it's a way for them to take control back of their own stories. An unfortunate side effect is that it can lead to these victim-survivors feeling they know more about your story than you.

They've survived it, so they feel they can tell who's the liar and who's the truthteller, who got off easy, who had it worse, who's stories are more than or less than, and that idea itself is a trauma response manifesting as something ugly, right? Abuse and assault are felt in so many different ways and manifest in so many diffferent forms, but this idea can take hold in victim-survivors as a means of taking control over what happened to them. If they can use - which Lestat does when he weaponises Claudia's rape against her in the train to force her to come home - undermine - which Claudia does against Lestat when she tells Louis not to take Lestat's truth as fact - or diminish - as Armand does against Lestat when he shrugs off Daniel's question about Magnus in 2.03 and talks about Lestat coming home in 2.08 - this subset of people will.

Armand is a character who has endured unimaginable sexual abuse. To divorce that from his understanding of Lestat's own trauma does both characters a huge disservice. How they navigate each other as two survivors of (very different!) forms of sexual violence is interesting, and it's unsurprising that Armand, having been groomed and assaulted by Marius, would view a maker's home as - - well, home.

And frankly regardless of that, if the show stays true to the book, Lestat will live there for a while after Magnus' death because he has no money, no one to call on, and no idea who he is now that he's been turned. Gabrielle lives with him for a while there! Magnus' tower is, in the books, a very complicated place for Lestat.

[cbrownjc]

I swear THIS is why the show feels like it has to hold some of ya'll's hands in the Inside the Episode features. The narrative, as it is right now, isn't supposed to give you an accurate picture of Lestat right now. You are getting other people's POVs of him and events that happened, with those people's opinions and accounts colored over with their own biases.

And that is why Lestat's portrayal so far hasn't been book-accurate. Because that is the freakin' point. 🙄 Armand told a version of events from TVL that makes himself look good and is NOT about telling the truth. How much more obvious could they have made this? Because there were clues everywhere that -- if you know the actual story of TVL -- that tell you it wasn't accurate. (Starting with the fact that Gabrielle -- who, in the book, was there for the majority of everything that was shown in the episode's flashback with Lestat -- was not there in Armand's version of events.)

Look I get it if you haven't read the books, and so are not sure if what Armand told about all of this was true or not (and you're not sure what to think about Lestat either). If you haven't read the books feeling that way about this is not only understandable but also by design. Non-book readers are not supposed to know if what Armand was saying was true or not right now. You are not supposed to fully know what is true or false about Lestat even. Because you guys are still getting to know Armand's character, and assessing things about him episode by episode. Right now, you all may think one thing about him only to have that opinion change by the end of the season.

And all non-book readers have to go on about Lestat are other people's opinions and stories about him at this point. Which, depending on your opinion of the people telling it, will shape your opinion of him right now. And again, that is also done by design.

But book readers I'm sorry, I'm just rolling my eyes at some of you at this point if you are thinking like the above anon or something about the show "hating" Lestat or whatever. After everything this show has done to lay out the unreliable narrator aspect and that POVs can be biased aspect and, most of all, what you all already know about Armand's character . . . that is your hand the producers and writers and Assad himself were holding in that Inside the Episode feature explaining the narrative to if you actually believe that this is how Lestat is going to be portrayed on the show going forward.

As I said in another post, the show is very much using a Rashomon Effect when it comes to its flashback storytelling right now. But I feel very much that that is going to change when we get to Season 3 and Lestat finally begins to talk for himself and tells events that happened from his own POV. (And will instead become one about Truth vs Illusion).

I think after this episode we may have to give up hopes of the writers portraying Lestat well at any point. They just don’t like him for whatever reason.

... You did hear ASSAD saying that Armand portrays Lestat in a certain light to make himself look good, right?

POVs people. It's a TALE. Told for an effect.

Of course Armand in Dubai would not tell how he kidnapped Nicki, tortured him, force-fed on Lestat and killed all his coven. He's trying to come across as the kind, generous, knowledgeable ancient vampire you can trust!!

You know?????

[mmelolabelle]

Armand is someone who has been has been trained (in brothels, by Marius, and by 500+ years worth of life experience) to adapt himself to what the people around him want. Throughout seasons 1-2, different people get very different versions of Armand, depending on who they are and who’s retelling the story at the time.

It’s the primary way Armand protects himself, whether he’s a teenage sex slave or the oldest, strongest person in the room. It’s how he controls people. Fundamentally, it’s the only way Armand knows to make people love him (an approximation of love at least). Worse, it’s the only way Armand knows how to love — by twisting and contorting himself into whatever form he thinks his current obsession wants or needs him to be. He even does it to his victims for crying out loud.

And then here’s Daniel, who is constantly seeking authenticity and truth. Who’s bullshit detector is never “off”. Who cannot tolerate any kind of masquerade, manipulation or lie – no matter how kind or well intentioned. Not out of any moral or ethical objection, but because Daniel simply cannot leave things well enough alone once something attracts his attention. He has to know. He has to see where it goes and how it ends.

“It’s my job, I’m built this way”

“It’s in your nature, Mr Molloy. Couldn’t get out the door without lobbing one more bomb.”

Daniel knew something was off about “Rashid” from the beginning, so he began to pick the situation in Dubai apart until Armand revealed himself. And then he kept going until he completely destroyed the narrative Armand had spent 77 years constructing.

Daniel deliberately and systematically pulled “Armand, Amadeo, Arun” apart and laid him bare with nothing but but a laptop, some free time, a near-suicidal disregard for his own personal safety and a mouth that just wouldn’t quit.

There’s power in being seen, in being known, ugly parts and all. What would it feel like, to be completely exposed like that for the first time in centuries?

So yeah it makes sense to me that Armand, who puts on all these acts and artifices to draw people in, but which only serve to ensure they’re kept at a distance, would turn his big sad orange eyes on the person who blew them all to smithereens and be all “…I wanna do this forever, actually.”

[kandelia-mangrove]

The argument in 2x5 of iwtv is of course iconic. But it also shows that we actually get so little of the true Loumand dynamic and as much as Armand is a manipulating queen, they actually have shared a lot with each other? Like Louis clearly knows a lot more detail about Armand's backstory than the carefully curated stuff they mention to Daniel (like the chop my hands of thing is wild, but he also mentions the cult celibacy stuff). because going back to S2 Episode 3, Louis is the one who walks in and finishes Armand's story. And at the time I was like, "oh thats just the story Armand told him", but he KNOWS there is more - which means they are actively conspiring to present this angle to Daniel. Like we underestimate how much they were both collectively telling this narrative of their life/romance. Truly wild on rewatch. Like they were very competent as partners (in crime and lying) like can you imagine Loustat effectively collaborating at this level?