![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
[Trying to post this almost 7k-word thing abt IWTV before S3 begins AND right on the cusp of 2026 FESTA kicking off.]
An AMC TV series in which Louis Point Du Lac (played by Jacob Anderson) sits for a new interview with Daniel Malloy (played by Eric Bogosian).
FTR, this happens 50 yrs after their first interview--which Louis considers incomplete and not the true story. Back then, Daniel was doing drugs and Louis hadn't come to terms with certain things abt his past . . .
Before I begin my yappin' let me go ahead and show My fannish Vampire Chronicles/IWTV credentials so y'all know where I'm coming from.
I've read several of Anne Rice's standalone novels: Cry to Heaven, Belinda, Exit to Eden, what was then the Sleeping Beauty trilogy (though there's now a 4th book out), and the first book of The Mummy: or Ramses of the Damned duology.
The only one of her books I've DNF was The Wolf Gift (the first of the werewolf novels.) Last time I read anything by Anne Rice (for the first time) was 2012 (the novel I DNF'd.)
As for the Vampire Chronicles, I read up to The Vampire Armand. So I stopped at the halfway point (finished book 6 out of the 13 written by Rice.) By 1998, I'd fallen out of love with her floral writing style. It'd become pretty clear to me even one book earlier (Memnoch the Devil) that she had an editor in name only. The more I read, the more I noticed how OTT and purple her writing had become. And so I grew distant from the whole saga. Every time she published a new book in the series, I'd consider picking it up, but never got around it then. And now I doubt I'll ever will.
Have read IWTV 4 times through years. It's pretty clear in my memory. I'm abt a week away from borrowing a copy of The Vampire Lestat. This will be my 1st reread of that book since the mid-90s. Although I remember the overall story, I kinda want to refresh my memory a little before S3 kicks off in a week's time. My general feelings abt it have always been v. neutral, IDK.
FWIW, I met Rice at a couple of book signings. She was v. gracious. IDK. In short, was a big fan of her books, kinda fell out at some point, and so now here I am!
OFC, when the Neil Jordan movie came out in 1994, I went to the premiere decked out in my best goth gear. It was a big fucking deal. Owned the soundtrack, owned the movie in VHS and DVD. Have lost count of how many times I've watched it.
When the Queen of the Damned movie premiered, I went to the theater. I have OPINIONS abt it, but I liked it too, hahah. My point is that I'm usually OK-to-enthusiastic abt Vampire Chronicles adaptations. :P
ANYWAYS, at some point during Pandemic Year One, I began hearing abt the TV series. NGL, I had some SRS BIZNESS DOUBTS cuz the CASTING WAS SO IMPORTANT. ESPECIALLY Lestat.
TBH, I've never heard of Sam Reid. I was v. ???? cuz he didn't look like the version of Lestat in my mind.
As for Jacob Anderson getting cast as Louis, I was 100% excited.
The first season premiere and took off in Fandom to the point that I could feel my "hypebacklash button" abt to get activated. So I pulled back and worked hard at ignoring anything abt it. Long story short, it wasn't until earlier this year that I remembered both seasons are available on Hoopla. I figured "eh, let me go watch it" . . .
First impressions abt the show
First of all, Jacob and Sam were FANTASTIC.
I liked Bogosian as Daniel. Especially how determined he was at getting Louis to answer his questions.
One boon from the TV show was that it gave Claudia a richer backstory. Following her along as she aged mentally while locked in the body of a 14-year old girl. Her attempts to work thru all of that plus the trauma that resulted from the uniqueness of her situation. OOF!
She was my fave character HANDS DOWN. Both actresses did a fantastic job in showing Claudia realizing the true consequences of being a vampire. It was heartbreaking and enraging AND SHE STILL WENT TOE TO TOE WITH LESTAT TO THE POINT I GOT GOOSEBUMPS, Y'ALL.
The cinematography was top notch. Set design was impeccable and all of the clothing was amazing too.
One of the things I enjoyed the most was how, despite my familiarity with the story, the changes (including Louis being Black and moving the story forward in time) were brilliant moves. Kicking off the past timeline in 1910 obvs underline the historical aspects BUT, at he same time, it was so far back (compared to 2026) as to feel too ancient.
The vampires WERE vampires and so the violence was pretty in your face. None of the gory scenes (which include disembowelment) made me queasy, but I do have to say it was A LOT.
Comparing both seasons
S1 had a stronger emotional impact because so much abt it centered on Louis cutting ties with his family; the introduction of Claudia; the underlining of Louis/Lestat being The Worst (β’), etc.
S2 opted for a different approach. It focused more on the psychology of certain characters. Louis was the heart of S2 (whereas in S1, it was Claudia's main role). The exploration as to how if a character is a vampire that had survived abuse, how far could they go before they break, and how would they pull themselves from darker moods was all excellently done.
Having said that, I'm not sure which season I liked best. For S1, as toxic and bad news for each other as they are, the romance between Louis and Lestat was chef's kiss (SMH AT MYSELF.) It's rare and beautiful, really. I liked how they show it thru words, actions, and behaviors. Even by the end of S2 where, for however vicious, selfish, and bratty Lestat is, he did care abt Louis. Now, was the love ENOUGH to keep Lestat from being horrid to Louis? NO. The abuse during the 7 or so yrs that Claudia left was grueling to sit thru.
MOVING ON
The ending brought Louis and Lestat together at a detente, meeting each other as best as they could, with Lestat showing some vulnerability (cuz he gotta be manipulative.) In some ways, he was something like a v. beautiful yet dangerous animal. In that he'll allow others to pet him until he got bored and then he'd destroy whoever was trying to love him. That's his nature, I guess.
Do I have any criticisms?
FOR S1
The last episode had so much building up to the climax--with plans on top of plans on top of plans--and, honestly, it dragged. I knew they had to do the set-up for S2, but I didn't end up enjoying the episode like I was meant to. IDK.
The two new vampire characters. Bruce and Antoinette. I was v. ???? abt why he showed up. And, I never warmed up to Antoinette as a fledging. She was such a doormat and her "behold! I'm a vampire who's Lestat's "true" ride or die!" scene in the last ep of S1 was so ridic. She was so unimpressive.
For Season 2
I never really vibed with Madeline. Β―\_(γ)_/Β―
Speaking of, I hated (HATED) that there was confirmation Claudia had gotten raped many times by Bruce. It did explain a little of where her anger in S2 came from, but I still disliked that, NGL.
Do I recommend it?
FUCK YEAH! The show has completely surpassed the source material. All of the changes have been for the better, the casting is PERFECTION, the level of gore is abt right, I could legit go on, y'all.
S1 gets at 4.8 out of 5 from me.
S2 gets a 4.6 out of 5. I found it less emotionally-engaging for me. Louis trying to deal with his trauma from Lestat without being aware that Armand's manipulating him. Ooof!
I know AMC is promoting this show as a part of "The Immortals Universe" (which is LULZY AF given how the whole franchise thing is v. out of fashion circa at least 7 yrs ago.) And I know they've tried (and failed) to launch a Talamasca series (that's been since cancelled) while still keeping The Mayfair Witches show alive. [For some reason, I never got around reading the books. They never caught my attention. Funnily enough, just as I was considering reading the MW books, I had already fallen out of love with Anne Rice's writing. So I kinda put the idea of reading the novels away.
At this point, there hasn't been anything that has caught my attention, so I'm not watching the show. π€·πΎββοΈ]
Queerness level:
Pfft! It's thru the roof. 'nough said.
OK, next up, I'm looking at different versions and taking a deeper dive into characters and plot. SPOILERS GALORE!
The one thing I had to keep in time when looking at all three (sometime four) formats was that there was a limited amount of time for the movies. Whereas, as of the time of this post, there are 15 or so hours of the TV show for the same canon. It's a bit unfair, but there's nothing I can do abt that.
BTW, I'm also including 2002's Queen of the Damned since some of the characters in the show and 1994 movie do appear in that film as well.
LOUIS
Book version
Overall, I think he's okay, if somewhat too whiny for the majority of the time. It was interesting to see him waxing poetic abt the philosophy of murder and his own inner turmoil, etc. I remember liking him a ton back when I first read the book, but have cooled off in the years since.
Now, this is a truth that I've had in my heart since I first read the IWTV book: Louis is a loser. He did get a bit better (in the book) when he got turned into a vampire, but his loser tendencies were then amplified by the end of that novel. IMO, he did achieve a certain level of stability in subsequent books, but there we are. It wasn't until my first reread of the novel that I understood why it was Lestat and not him that became the main protag of the series. :P
Movie version
Brad Pitt toned down the wah-wah from book!Louis a little bit. Physically speaking, I do think he resembled the way Louis was described in the book.
Despite my dislike of Brad Pitt's public persona (and turning out to be a generally shitty person), I can't deny the guy did what he had to do with this role. So it worked good enough. Also, he and Tom Cruise had good chemistry.
AFAIK, Louis never showed up in the Queen of the Damned movie. There was a character who I used to think it was Louis cuz of his proximity to Lestat? However, the credits say that character was Armand, so I guess Louis decided to travel to Outer Space or else was in deep sleep underground.
TV version
To no one's surprise, this was the SUPERIOR Louis. Jacob played him as someone who was a relatively good person (he's one of the 'better' characters in terms of morals, maybe?) BUT he's also in denial abt the terrible things he did over the years. I like that he was less conventional moody (or theatrical?) than Brad Pitt's take on the same character.
Even though, realistically, there's only one (1) episode of Louis as a human, so much was shown of him back then that viewers got to see he was pre-meeting Lestat. So, once he's a vampire, it's easy to understand his behavior. AND EVEN THEN, the show still dropped enough surprises to build up layers that showed Louis was just as messy as Lestat but in a different way.
Some of this was cuz he'd been so repressed (as a queer man) for YEARS when he was human. He moved through an in between space: he could and did 'hang out' with rich, white ppl because he made money for them, BUT would never be accepted due to being Creole.
He's also a deeply closeted gay man who paid a sex worker to help him keep a 'manly' reputation (even though all they did is sit down and talk.) Finally, he's someone who loved his family, but also rejected the obligations that come with being the main breadwinner (such as getting married to a woman, getting her pregnant, etc.) So he juggled all of that AND compartmentalizes to the point that, by the time he met Lestat, he was completely lost.
Particularly because right at that moment, he's in mourning someone he cared abt a lot, his mother was blaming him for something that it's not his fault, and he's simply tired of everything. Which was the moment when Lestat showed up dangling a solution to all of that pain. Allegedly.
So I get why he made the choice (despite it being a bad choice overall.)
Another thing is that, even though he got powers once he's a vampire, none of that had healed the hurt of being the target of racism and homophobia. He's got ways to fight back now, so to speak, and was v., v. rich, but he's not an omnipotent being either.
LESTAT
Book version
Everything abt him was from Louis' POV, so it's v. much abt Lestat starting as a dreamy guy who turned out to be a monster. Lestat was clearly positioned in the book as a potential villain/frenemy of Louis. It's pretty understandable why he was so miffed abt his 'mischaracterization' in Book 1 to the point that the following book was all abt HIM and his life story, haha. He's such a DIVA, I swear!
Movie version 1
Tom Cruise's portrayal was greatness. IHNI what was in the air or what kind of notes he studied to embody that character. All I know is that this was one of his BEST roles hands down! He looked great with that blond wig--which supported the HIGH CAMP FACTOR that Cruise brought into his acting. Cuz, at the end of the day, one of the biggest reasons why he's a fave of many has to do with being a character that's v. impulsive and bratty. Cruise got that down pat.
Hell, I was rooting for him FROM THE GET. Which is hilarious cuz I was a Louis girlie back when I first read the book in the early 1990s. But in the MOVIE? I was all for Cruise's Lestat and his ridiculousness. Additionally, Cruise's Lestat was a hedonist and he carried that as a badge of pride, LOL. IDEK, y'all, other than having to make peace with the fact that I'll always have a soft spot for the movie because of Tom Cruise of all people. o___O!
Movie version 2
Stewart Townsend in Queen of the Damned had the arrogance that's part of the character's inner world. Unfortch, he didn't look like Lestat (he wasn't blond for reasons that only the production team could explain. IF it was a case of him looking ridic with blond hair, then they should've cast someone else!)
ANYWAYS, he also took this role way too seriously. His whole presentation of Lestat ended up weaker out of everyone in the cast. And that's despite exuding a somewhat interesting/aloof vibe. Lestat's snobbishness was legendary, but there was more to the character than that. Townsend didn't bring much to the role. He lacked the range AND talent. ΰ²₯_ΰ²₯
TV version
Sam Reid surprised me. Yes, he had the look, vibe, and mannerisms that were necessary to present Lestat to 2026 audiences. In some ways, he was a good in-between the two movie versions AND also having an extra layer from the book canon. He played up the camp with a side serving of arrogance. So he's my fave version of Lestat after Cruise. Occasionally, I like him a bit better than Cruise. It depends on my mood, LOL.
Whereas Cruise's Lestat was shallower (personality wise), there was a lot more substance on Reid's portrayal of Lestat. By logic, he's got 7-8 hours per season to showcase all of the character's inner world, so he could go every which way in his acting without worrying that he'll run out of time. This meant there's a coherence in his performance that made it much more attractive to watch.
Just like with Jacob's version of Louis, I liked how much Sam understood his character and respected that character's journey. Lestat was someone who had BEYOND RIDIC LEVELS OF CHARM and an occasional rococo-style of dialogue that takes skill to perform convincingly enough for the camera. Sam played this character in a way that's ambiguous as to whether he wants to seduce you or kill you, LOOOOOL. He really liked to 'play with his food."
Abt the only thing that did throw me off was the deepness of his voice. At the same time, it wasn't enough for me to put me off the show.
CLAUDIA
Book version
She got turned at 5. Which was something I hadn't picked up the first time I read the novel. But I certainly felt disturbed abt Claudia kinda falling in love with Louis when I picked up the book the 2nd time (FTR, I'm aware of what was the basis for the character.)
Movie Version
Kudos to Kirsten Dunst in the movie cuz she was able to say so much abt Claudia's storyline with the limited amount of time she had. Whereas there's a lot of time in the TV show.
Kirsten's approach was that of a much more blatantly tragic figure. She looked slightly younger than TV show's Claudia (who was more of a pre-teen). Her interactions with Armand were fewer. And yet, she had the talent to reflect Claudia growing up mentally yet staying trapped in a little girl's body..
TV version
S1 was played by Bailey Bass was AMAZING. I liked that the character had been aged up to 14. Bass' level of acting SURPASSED Dunst's in terms of the mental age vs. physical body duality. She did a jaw-droppingly good job at that. And butted heads with and poked at Lestat in truly electrifying scenes. Also her love (which was less parental and more of a sibling bond) with Louis was comforting too.
I liked S2 Claudia out of all 3. It was her fury what got me to root for her (despite knowing what was to come.) The fact that it was so intense she'd pretty much shut down. The show didn't make it easy either. Such as the warped result of her live in Paris.
DANIEL
I'd say that both book and movie versions seemed fairly similar. Or, at the v. least, they felt like that to me to the point of not wanting to make separate sections for them.
TV version
Finished both seasons and I remained still at odds with him. OTOH, I liked that he called out EVERYONE: Louis, Lestat, Claudia, Armand, hell even Santiago for what they did to each other. Rarely got distracted by all of the obfuscating, blatant lies, and distorted memories. Just like with Claudia, the series provided him with the space to show more of his background.
OTOH, I was unable to say that becoming a vampire has changed my opinion abt him.
ARMAND
Book version
Per the description in the novel, he had a youthful face, but was also the oldest vampire. His (emotional) romance with Louis made sense. FWIW, I've always found it interesting that it took forever and a day for Louis to realize how deeply fucked up Armand actually was.
He was one of my fave characters for the first 4 books in the Vampire Chronicles.At least until his own book--which immediately left me doing this at him π πΎββοΈ (That book is LEGIT BAD!)
Movie version 1
I'll be the first one to say that the filmmakers should've gone with someone else and not Antonio Banderas. FTR, yes, Banderas was game to play up Armand's fluid sexuality AND he was v. beautiful at that time. But he also looked older. Additionally he either pissed someone from the wig department off OR there was v. little left in the budget after Lestat and Claudia's wigs. Cuz he's doing a relatively good job with the role . . . with a fancy Party City wig. π.
Acting-wise, though, Banderas showed the character's world-weariness and desperation quite well. I've watched this movie many times and I'm STILL conflicted abt the way this character was portrayed. Go figure.
Movie version 2
Queen of the Damned's Armand (played by Matthew Newton) was who I'd assume was Louis. My best guess was that the movie combined Armand and Louis into one character. Which confused the fuck out of me. I kept looking at the character thinking "OK, there's Louis. But where's Armand?". Because I remembered him having an important role in the novel.
He had a Robert Plant (during the height of Led Zeppellin) look that made NO SENSE. I didn't get him or liked him. FWIW, he had less than a paragraph's worth of dialogue, but IDEK y'all.
TV version
Assad Zaman's Armand was all abt self-preservation. Maybe because of everything he'd live thru in all of his years (he's one of the oldest vampires around), he was just as selfish as Lestat (though in a subtler way.) Zaman was great at highlighting many facets (both goodish and bad) of an already interesting character. He was a lot more manipulative from the start. Not to mention ridic handsome too (like the rest of the cast.)
MADELINE
In the novel and movie, Claudia's a little girl and there's a whole thing abt how Madeline's gonna be the mother that Claudia needed. IIRC, by the time Claudia met her, Madeline had lost a child.
But, in the show, Claudia (who is stuck in the body of a 14-y.o.) and Madeline's dynamic was blurrier. Louis even asked them if they're companions (the way he had been with Lestat and was currently with Armand). Their reply was a little odd: Claudia mulled her answer while Madeline said yes v. enthusiastically. It's pretty much a given that they were lovers. I was like π¬π€πΆ cuz it was playing too fast and loose with lines.
I do think that the (canonical) maternal version of her wasn't gonna be a good fit for TV!Claudia. Ultimately, TV!Madeline was an enigma for me. I think I preferred the movie version over the book or TV one.
SANTIAGO
Book version
Even though he did become a crucial character to the latter part of the novel, I can't say Santiago registered as someone I've kept track of whenever I've picked up the novel.
Movie version
Stephen Rea did the most with the v. few scenes his character was in. His version was a bit more of buffoon that (eventually) turns v. vicious.
TV show version
Ben Daniels was really great in this role. He was devious and fascinating every time he poked at Louis. Their interaction was so yummy because it was tense 99.9% of the time. He also wasn't subtle abt wanting to take over the coven and was, instead, biding his time. Which added a layer of WTF-ry cuz Armand had kinda accepted it?
RAGLAN JAMES
I was v. ??? abt the TV version. Dunno if it was cuz it's Justin Kirk or the sliminess of this version, but I was quite π π½ββοΈ abt him. THAT SAID, I did liked the seeds (so early on) for Book 4. IJS. OJO
At the same time, I finished both seasons still at odds with his tiny!storyline. Was he really in Talamasca OR was it just a con job he was pulling on Daniel?
The Two Main Ships (I acknowledge the OT3, but I'm also kinda neutral abt it, so I'm skipping it this one time.)
Louis/Lestat
OK, this is v. uncool, dare I say problematique of me, but I ultimately loved them. They're TERRIBLE for each other, but the kind of chemistry they've got? FETCH ME MY SMELLING SALTS! I WAS SWEATING WHENEVER THEY GOT ALL LUSTY WITH EACH OTHER!!!
Both actors went for the emotional core of every scene and that heightened the INTENSE AF attraction to each other. ON TOP OF THAT, it was super clear that both actors trusted each other. Neither one was uncomfortable with or reluctant abt the romance or intimacy.
If someone asked me, I wouldn't call them a Power Couple cuz they were so gorram messy and toxic! Frex, the high levels of manipulation from Lestat, pockets of resentment from Louis' perspective, their constant push-and-pull until things got extremely violent. They're deffo NOT #CoupleGoals.
Louis/Armand
In the movie, Louis mentioned that he and Armand had traveled for a while, but that eventually he'd realized that Armand didn't have anything else to offer in terms of wisdom.
In the TV show, he and Louis had been together for around 70 yrs. So they've got their domestic vibes down. You could tell they're together, but it was almost like they were playing-acting as a couple. Instead of being an actual couple. I feel that Armand was always aware that he couldn't (much as he wanted to and tried to) sever the BOND between Louis and Lestat.
See also Louis obsession with Lestat to the point that Armand flat out told him how sick he was of hearing that name. And, by that point, it'd been DECADES into their own relationship.
FORMAT
The TV Show reigned β¨supremeβ¨.
The movie was slightly better than the book. It condensed a lot of the main plot into a 2-hr space while still hitting enough emotional beats.
The book was v. much "of it's time".
Are non-readers missing anything from it if they decide to skip it? I'm gonna say no. In part cuz, compared to the TV show, the book was on a whole 'nother galaxy w/r/t the story arcs. Also, the protags were super chill abt being racist and (in Louis' case) slave owners (π¬). All of this was presented as "it was part of the culture/society at the time." πππ. Also, the writing was V. OTT/flowery.
SETTING
The novel began right as the US became an official republic.
Both movies were set in contemporary times. IWTV had a v. heavy 90s aesthetic. Every time I've watched it, I can't deny a twinge or two of nostalgia. QOTD went into nu-metal vibes that kinda worked? There's a lot of opulence as well. I appreciated it, IDK.
TV show's S1 was set in the Progressive Era (1890s-1920s) which was when so many things like urbanization and certain reforms happened such as when (white) women got the right to vote. Alongside, ofc, as to massive corruption and a lot of the upper classes trying their best to keep the lower classes oppressed, etc.
One thing I didn't catch at first was how quickly WW1 happened in the show (IIRC, it's relegated to one or two eps?) Which was an interesting shorthand for how human events were unimportant to Lestat, Louis, and Claudia.
S2's focus on WW2 and its aftermath was also well done.
PLOT
Book version
Everything was told from Louis' perspective. It dripped with purple prose. There were some parts filled with beautiful writing, high emotions, etc. But Louis did turned out to be something of dud, IMO..
Movie version
It distilled a lot from the canon in a way that made more sense than not. There were whole chunks of mini-storylines (such as the whole deal with Lestat's father) that were swept away. Usually for the better. The movie still managed to tell a good yarn.
TV show
One thing that had me ???? over the past year and a half was seeing ppl pick up the novel after watching the series and criticizing the novel. I came across many reviews where folks mentioned their disappointment at how cheesy the novel was or how certain things (such as Louis owning slaves and running a plantation) had been glossed over thru the years by the Vampire Chronicles and/or Anne Rice fandoms.
They also couldn't believe that so many of the things that made me a fan of the show (such as the topics that the show dives into) didn't exist in the book.
However, after watching the show, those readers' reactions made so much sense! The depth of WTF-ery they must have felt while reading that novel must have been ridic, hahah.
Particularly with how the show wove in themes of race, queerness, politics, community etc. Things that didn't appear in the novel or movie. The fact that Louis was Creole was a big deal. And I loved that there was purpose behind casting a Black British actor for a role. Same as casting Bailey Bass and Delainey Hayes as Claudia. It mattered. Racebending the characters was cool, sure, but it also meant that sooner or later (IF TPTB behind the show really did care abt these changes) would have to address race. And they did in a way that had me SITTING UP EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.
It didn't talk down to viewers. Instead, it invited viewers to reflect on how things were back then and how they're now.
Several of the scenes had Louis trying to explain to Lestat that his reactions (both as a human and, later on, as a vampire) had to do with racist bullshittery. And Lestat didn't get that because he's a white guy. I love that the plot didn't pull away from that point of tension.
Now I'm gonna say something that might upset some, but it's gotta be said: it's been chilling and infuriating to see the way a lot of fans (especially white ppl) have reacted to this show. Cuz some have been upset abt Louis, Claudia, and Armand no longer be white (nevermind that, canonically, Armand wasn't white? But I digress.) Also, there's been a really weird (and I do mean really weird and gross) not-quite-hidden racist push even among ppl who claim to ship Louis/Lestat or Louis/Armand. I guess racist ppl gotta shake out their racist ya-yas for everyone to see? ππ½ππ½ππ½ππ½π π π π
FWIW, the original text still exists. IF ppl want to go and read abt the slaves and the plantation, Louis' white skin, the white genteel ideas of the South (including the idealization of slavery times), it's still there. Same as with the movie and things like the idea that Louis' slaves were respectful and liked him a lot until Lestat showed up.
Whereas in the show, the topics of race, the horrors of slavery, and how both shaped a lot of who Louis was as a human and continued to exist as a vampire were front and center. I truly and deeply appreciated that.
Season 2 Plot Points
* I loved seeing Louis going from someone who was completely at sea, lost, and depressed. His skepticism abt other vampires. Even though he's not for or against the larger conflict in WW 2, it still touched him (and Claudia). Such as the areas they travelled thru had checkpoints and they had to keep coming up with reasons why they're in Europe. There's a point in which Louis was talking on the war to the point that humans' blood tasted wrong, sad, and was full of despair. OTOH, it still fed him and Claudia. OTOH, they were also barely alive themselves because the quality of the blood was so poor. Which, yeah, the bodies, minds, and souls of ppl who live in a constant state of being retraumatized (be it because of war or something else) were gonna be affected. It was a small but great observation. To me, it pointed out the level of detail that the screenwriters went into.
* I liked Louis' journey in S2 as he tried to process two different traumas from two separate times in his life and yet both traumas were interconnected. His determination to keep on surviving once he and Claudia get to Paris. See also him trying to figure out what he really wanted. And this was where Delainey Hayles as Claudia also pushed him in a good way. She asked him something like "who are you now that you're away from Lestat? Who are you if I am (potentially) gone to do my own thing?" I wouldn't quite say he was successful at answering either question, but that made sense to me.
THEN, there's the WHOLE LOTTA MESS of his relationship with Lestat. They were TERRIBLE for each other, but they're also connected, bound in a way that they couldn't even explain. So his psyche was even messing with him with imaginary!Lestat. Such as in ep. 5 when, hundreds of years later, Lestat did reached out to him and, despite being unable to communicate all the way thru, Louis was DESPERATE to hear something from Lestat.
* The Armand that showed up in S2 was HORRIBLE, but in the best way, LOOOOOOOOOOOOL. His backstory included years of abuse and trauma. As one of oldest vampires around, he'd seen so much and didn't even know what to do anymore. His connections to Lestat and Louis are MESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSY to the point I kept going "lorde, here we go with the chaos" every other scene, LOLsob.
I did liked that he never clicked with Claudia.
* The whole thing with Daniel was nasty in the worst way. Starting with how it'd gone back DECADES? I got it cuz Armand was v. sensual and manipulative (derogatory). Assad was amazing in the role, tho. He had off-the-charts chemistry with pretty much everyone.
Just like in S1, I remained frenemies to Daniel. OTOH, he did bring out what needed to be said (such as Lestat having been abusive toward Louis--despite Louis trying the hardest to dismiss that). Also the way Louis, Armand, and Lestat were interconnected in all kinds of ways didn't help Louis any. In certain ways, Daniel did aimed for honesty.
OTOH, I didn't like how much snark he threw whenever the conversation topic was Claudia. I remember this being more obvious in S1, but his reactions abt her were always weird (to me, at least). I'm still not sure if it was a case of him being disturbed abt Claudia's love for violence OR if he was suspicious of Louis' gentler/rose-colored glasses-like recollections of her.
Final Thoughts
I will most deffo continue on w/S3, a.k.a The Vampire Lestat. Although, because of this year's FESTA, I will most likely be abt 3 weeks or so behind everyone else. BTS will always get my attention no matter what.
An AMC TV series in which Louis Point Du Lac (played by Jacob Anderson) sits for a new interview with Daniel Malloy (played by Eric Bogosian).
FTR, this happens 50 yrs after their first interview--which Louis considers incomplete and not the true story. Back then, Daniel was doing drugs and Louis hadn't come to terms with certain things abt his past . . .
Before I begin my yappin' let me go ahead and show My fannish Vampire Chronicles/IWTV credentials so y'all know where I'm coming from.
I've read several of Anne Rice's standalone novels: Cry to Heaven, Belinda, Exit to Eden, what was then the Sleeping Beauty trilogy (though there's now a 4th book out), and the first book of The Mummy: or Ramses of the Damned duology.
The only one of her books I've DNF was The Wolf Gift (the first of the werewolf novels.) Last time I read anything by Anne Rice (for the first time) was 2012 (the novel I DNF'd.)
As for the Vampire Chronicles, I read up to The Vampire Armand. So I stopped at the halfway point (finished book 6 out of the 13 written by Rice.) By 1998, I'd fallen out of love with her floral writing style. It'd become pretty clear to me even one book earlier (Memnoch the Devil) that she had an editor in name only. The more I read, the more I noticed how OTT and purple her writing had become. And so I grew distant from the whole saga. Every time she published a new book in the series, I'd consider picking it up, but never got around it then. And now I doubt I'll ever will.
Have read IWTV 4 times through years. It's pretty clear in my memory. I'm abt a week away from borrowing a copy of The Vampire Lestat. This will be my 1st reread of that book since the mid-90s. Although I remember the overall story, I kinda want to refresh my memory a little before S3 kicks off in a week's time. My general feelings abt it have always been v. neutral, IDK.
FWIW, I met Rice at a couple of book signings. She was v. gracious. IDK. In short, was a big fan of her books, kinda fell out at some point, and so now here I am!
OFC, when the Neil Jordan movie came out in 1994, I went to the premiere decked out in my best goth gear. It was a big fucking deal. Owned the soundtrack, owned the movie in VHS and DVD. Have lost count of how many times I've watched it.
When the Queen of the Damned movie premiered, I went to the theater. I have OPINIONS abt it, but I liked it too, hahah. My point is that I'm usually OK-to-enthusiastic abt Vampire Chronicles adaptations. :P
ANYWAYS, at some point during Pandemic Year One, I began hearing abt the TV series. NGL, I had some SRS BIZNESS DOUBTS cuz the CASTING WAS SO IMPORTANT. ESPECIALLY Lestat.
TBH, I've never heard of Sam Reid. I was v. ???? cuz he didn't look like the version of Lestat in my mind.
As for Jacob Anderson getting cast as Louis, I was 100% excited.
The first season premiere and took off in Fandom to the point that I could feel my "hypebacklash button" abt to get activated. So I pulled back and worked hard at ignoring anything abt it. Long story short, it wasn't until earlier this year that I remembered both seasons are available on Hoopla. I figured "eh, let me go watch it" . . .
First impressions abt the show
First of all, Jacob and Sam were FANTASTIC.
I liked Bogosian as Daniel. Especially how determined he was at getting Louis to answer his questions.
One boon from the TV show was that it gave Claudia a richer backstory. Following her along as she aged mentally while locked in the body of a 14-year old girl. Her attempts to work thru all of that plus the trauma that resulted from the uniqueness of her situation. OOF!
She was my fave character HANDS DOWN. Both actresses did a fantastic job in showing Claudia realizing the true consequences of being a vampire. It was heartbreaking and enraging AND SHE STILL WENT TOE TO TOE WITH LESTAT TO THE POINT I GOT GOOSEBUMPS, Y'ALL.
The cinematography was top notch. Set design was impeccable and all of the clothing was amazing too.
One of the things I enjoyed the most was how, despite my familiarity with the story, the changes (including Louis being Black and moving the story forward in time) were brilliant moves. Kicking off the past timeline in 1910 obvs underline the historical aspects BUT, at he same time, it was so far back (compared to 2026) as to feel too ancient.
The vampires WERE vampires and so the violence was pretty in your face. None of the gory scenes (which include disembowelment) made me queasy, but I do have to say it was A LOT.
Comparing both seasons
Here on out, there will be spoilers for the book, the movies, and both seasons of the TV show
S1 had a stronger emotional impact because so much abt it centered on Louis cutting ties with his family; the introduction of Claudia; the underlining of Louis/Lestat being The Worst (β’), etc.
S2 opted for a different approach. It focused more on the psychology of certain characters. Louis was the heart of S2 (whereas in S1, it was Claudia's main role). The exploration as to how if a character is a vampire that had survived abuse, how far could they go before they break, and how would they pull themselves from darker moods was all excellently done.
Having said that, I'm not sure which season I liked best. For S1, as toxic and bad news for each other as they are, the romance between Louis and Lestat was chef's kiss (SMH AT MYSELF.) It's rare and beautiful, really. I liked how they show it thru words, actions, and behaviors. Even by the end of S2 where, for however vicious, selfish, and bratty Lestat is, he did care abt Louis. Now, was the love ENOUGH to keep Lestat from being horrid to Louis? NO. The abuse during the 7 or so yrs that Claudia left was grueling to sit thru.
MOVING ON
The ending brought Louis and Lestat together at a detente, meeting each other as best as they could, with Lestat showing some vulnerability (cuz he gotta be manipulative.) In some ways, he was something like a v. beautiful yet dangerous animal. In that he'll allow others to pet him until he got bored and then he'd destroy whoever was trying to love him. That's his nature, I guess.
Do I have any criticisms?
FOR S1
The last episode had so much building up to the climax--with plans on top of plans on top of plans--and, honestly, it dragged. I knew they had to do the set-up for S2, but I didn't end up enjoying the episode like I was meant to. IDK.
The two new vampire characters. Bruce and Antoinette. I was v. ???? abt why he showed up. And, I never warmed up to Antoinette as a fledging. She was such a doormat and her "behold! I'm a vampire who's Lestat's "true" ride or die!" scene in the last ep of S1 was so ridic. She was so unimpressive.
For Season 2
I never really vibed with Madeline. Β―\_(γ)_/Β―
Speaking of, I hated (HATED) that there was confirmation Claudia had gotten raped many times by Bruce. It did explain a little of where her anger in S2 came from, but I still disliked that, NGL.
Do I recommend it?
FUCK YEAH! The show has completely surpassed the source material. All of the changes have been for the better, the casting is PERFECTION, the level of gore is abt right, I could legit go on, y'all.
S1 gets at 4.8 out of 5 from me.
S2 gets a 4.6 out of 5. I found it less emotionally-engaging for me. Louis trying to deal with his trauma from Lestat without being aware that Armand's manipulating him. Ooof!
I know AMC is promoting this show as a part of "The Immortals Universe" (which is LULZY AF given how the whole franchise thing is v. out of fashion circa at least 7 yrs ago.) And I know they've tried (and failed) to launch a Talamasca series (that's been since cancelled) while still keeping The Mayfair Witches show alive. [For some reason, I never got around reading the books. They never caught my attention. Funnily enough, just as I was considering reading the MW books, I had already fallen out of love with Anne Rice's writing. So I kinda put the idea of reading the novels away.
At this point, there hasn't been anything that has caught my attention, so I'm not watching the show. π€·πΎββοΈ]
Queerness level:
Pfft! It's thru the roof. 'nough said.
OK, next up, I'm looking at different versions and taking a deeper dive into characters and plot. SPOILERS GALORE!
The one thing I had to keep in time when looking at all three (sometime four) formats was that there was a limited amount of time for the movies. Whereas, as of the time of this post, there are 15 or so hours of the TV show for the same canon. It's a bit unfair, but there's nothing I can do abt that.
BTW, I'm also including 2002's Queen of the Damned since some of the characters in the show and 1994 movie do appear in that film as well.
LOUIS
Book version
Overall, I think he's okay, if somewhat too whiny for the majority of the time. It was interesting to see him waxing poetic abt the philosophy of murder and his own inner turmoil, etc. I remember liking him a ton back when I first read the book, but have cooled off in the years since.
Now, this is a truth that I've had in my heart since I first read the IWTV book: Louis is a loser. He did get a bit better (in the book) when he got turned into a vampire, but his loser tendencies were then amplified by the end of that novel. IMO, he did achieve a certain level of stability in subsequent books, but there we are. It wasn't until my first reread of the novel that I understood why it was Lestat and not him that became the main protag of the series. :P
Movie version
Brad Pitt toned down the wah-wah from book!Louis a little bit. Physically speaking, I do think he resembled the way Louis was described in the book.
Despite my dislike of Brad Pitt's public persona (and turning out to be a generally shitty person), I can't deny the guy did what he had to do with this role. So it worked good enough. Also, he and Tom Cruise had good chemistry.
AFAIK, Louis never showed up in the Queen of the Damned movie. There was a character who I used to think it was Louis cuz of his proximity to Lestat? However, the credits say that character was Armand, so I guess Louis decided to travel to Outer Space or else was in deep sleep underground.
TV version
To no one's surprise, this was the SUPERIOR Louis. Jacob played him as someone who was a relatively good person (he's one of the 'better' characters in terms of morals, maybe?) BUT he's also in denial abt the terrible things he did over the years. I like that he was less conventional moody (or theatrical?) than Brad Pitt's take on the same character.
Even though, realistically, there's only one (1) episode of Louis as a human, so much was shown of him back then that viewers got to see he was pre-meeting Lestat. So, once he's a vampire, it's easy to understand his behavior. AND EVEN THEN, the show still dropped enough surprises to build up layers that showed Louis was just as messy as Lestat but in a different way.
Some of this was cuz he'd been so repressed (as a queer man) for YEARS when he was human. He moved through an in between space: he could and did 'hang out' with rich, white ppl because he made money for them, BUT would never be accepted due to being Creole.
He's also a deeply closeted gay man who paid a sex worker to help him keep a 'manly' reputation (even though all they did is sit down and talk.) Finally, he's someone who loved his family, but also rejected the obligations that come with being the main breadwinner (such as getting married to a woman, getting her pregnant, etc.) So he juggled all of that AND compartmentalizes to the point that, by the time he met Lestat, he was completely lost.
Particularly because right at that moment, he's in mourning someone he cared abt a lot, his mother was blaming him for something that it's not his fault, and he's simply tired of everything. Which was the moment when Lestat showed up dangling a solution to all of that pain. Allegedly.
So I get why he made the choice (despite it being a bad choice overall.)
Another thing is that, even though he got powers once he's a vampire, none of that had healed the hurt of being the target of racism and homophobia. He's got ways to fight back now, so to speak, and was v., v. rich, but he's not an omnipotent being either.
LESTAT
Book version
Everything abt him was from Louis' POV, so it's v. much abt Lestat starting as a dreamy guy who turned out to be a monster. Lestat was clearly positioned in the book as a potential villain/frenemy of Louis. It's pretty understandable why he was so miffed abt his 'mischaracterization' in Book 1 to the point that the following book was all abt HIM and his life story, haha. He's such a DIVA, I swear!
Movie version 1
Tom Cruise's portrayal was greatness. IHNI what was in the air or what kind of notes he studied to embody that character. All I know is that this was one of his BEST roles hands down! He looked great with that blond wig--which supported the HIGH CAMP FACTOR that Cruise brought into his acting. Cuz, at the end of the day, one of the biggest reasons why he's a fave of many has to do with being a character that's v. impulsive and bratty. Cruise got that down pat.
Hell, I was rooting for him FROM THE GET. Which is hilarious cuz I was a Louis girlie back when I first read the book in the early 1990s. But in the MOVIE? I was all for Cruise's Lestat and his ridiculousness. Additionally, Cruise's Lestat was a hedonist and he carried that as a badge of pride, LOL. IDEK, y'all, other than having to make peace with the fact that I'll always have a soft spot for the movie because of Tom Cruise of all people. o___O!
Movie version 2
Stewart Townsend in Queen of the Damned had the arrogance that's part of the character's inner world. Unfortch, he didn't look like Lestat (he wasn't blond for reasons that only the production team could explain. IF it was a case of him looking ridic with blond hair, then they should've cast someone else!)
ANYWAYS, he also took this role way too seriously. His whole presentation of Lestat ended up weaker out of everyone in the cast. And that's despite exuding a somewhat interesting/aloof vibe. Lestat's snobbishness was legendary, but there was more to the character than that. Townsend didn't bring much to the role. He lacked the range AND talent. ΰ²₯_ΰ²₯
TV version
Sam Reid surprised me. Yes, he had the look, vibe, and mannerisms that were necessary to present Lestat to 2026 audiences. In some ways, he was a good in-between the two movie versions AND also having an extra layer from the book canon. He played up the camp with a side serving of arrogance. So he's my fave version of Lestat after Cruise. Occasionally, I like him a bit better than Cruise. It depends on my mood, LOL.
Whereas Cruise's Lestat was shallower (personality wise), there was a lot more substance on Reid's portrayal of Lestat. By logic, he's got 7-8 hours per season to showcase all of the character's inner world, so he could go every which way in his acting without worrying that he'll run out of time. This meant there's a coherence in his performance that made it much more attractive to watch.
Just like with Jacob's version of Louis, I liked how much Sam understood his character and respected that character's journey. Lestat was someone who had BEYOND RIDIC LEVELS OF CHARM and an occasional rococo-style of dialogue that takes skill to perform convincingly enough for the camera. Sam played this character in a way that's ambiguous as to whether he wants to seduce you or kill you, LOOOOOL. He really liked to 'play with his food."
Abt the only thing that did throw me off was the deepness of his voice. At the same time, it wasn't enough for me to put me off the show.
CLAUDIA
Book version
She got turned at 5. Which was something I hadn't picked up the first time I read the novel. But I certainly felt disturbed abt Claudia kinda falling in love with Louis when I picked up the book the 2nd time (FTR, I'm aware of what was the basis for the character.)
Movie Version
Kudos to Kirsten Dunst in the movie cuz she was able to say so much abt Claudia's storyline with the limited amount of time she had. Whereas there's a lot of time in the TV show.
Kirsten's approach was that of a much more blatantly tragic figure. She looked slightly younger than TV show's Claudia (who was more of a pre-teen). Her interactions with Armand were fewer. And yet, she had the talent to reflect Claudia growing up mentally yet staying trapped in a little girl's body..
TV version
S1 was played by Bailey Bass was AMAZING. I liked that the character had been aged up to 14. Bass' level of acting SURPASSED Dunst's in terms of the mental age vs. physical body duality. She did a jaw-droppingly good job at that. And butted heads with and poked at Lestat in truly electrifying scenes. Also her love (which was less parental and more of a sibling bond) with Louis was comforting too.
I liked S2 Claudia out of all 3. It was her fury what got me to root for her (despite knowing what was to come.) The fact that it was so intense she'd pretty much shut down. The show didn't make it easy either. Such as the warped result of her live in Paris.
DANIEL
I'd say that both book and movie versions seemed fairly similar. Or, at the v. least, they felt like that to me to the point of not wanting to make separate sections for them.
TV version
Finished both seasons and I remained still at odds with him. OTOH, I liked that he called out EVERYONE: Louis, Lestat, Claudia, Armand, hell even Santiago for what they did to each other. Rarely got distracted by all of the obfuscating, blatant lies, and distorted memories. Just like with Claudia, the series provided him with the space to show more of his background.
OTOH, I was unable to say that becoming a vampire has changed my opinion abt him.
ARMAND
Book version
Per the description in the novel, he had a youthful face, but was also the oldest vampire. His (emotional) romance with Louis made sense. FWIW, I've always found it interesting that it took forever and a day for Louis to realize how deeply fucked up Armand actually was.
He was one of my fave characters for the first 4 books in the Vampire Chronicles.At least until his own book--which immediately left me doing this at him π πΎββοΈ (That book is LEGIT BAD!)
Movie version 1
I'll be the first one to say that the filmmakers should've gone with someone else and not Antonio Banderas. FTR, yes, Banderas was game to play up Armand's fluid sexuality AND he was v. beautiful at that time. But he also looked older. Additionally he either pissed someone from the wig department off OR there was v. little left in the budget after Lestat and Claudia's wigs. Cuz he's doing a relatively good job with the role . . . with a fancy Party City wig. π.
Acting-wise, though, Banderas showed the character's world-weariness and desperation quite well. I've watched this movie many times and I'm STILL conflicted abt the way this character was portrayed. Go figure.
Movie version 2
Queen of the Damned's Armand (played by Matthew Newton) was who I'd assume was Louis. My best guess was that the movie combined Armand and Louis into one character. Which confused the fuck out of me. I kept looking at the character thinking "OK, there's Louis. But where's Armand?". Because I remembered him having an important role in the novel.
He had a Robert Plant (during the height of Led Zeppellin) look that made NO SENSE. I didn't get him or liked him. FWIW, he had less than a paragraph's worth of dialogue, but IDEK y'all.
TV version
Assad Zaman's Armand was all abt self-preservation. Maybe because of everything he'd live thru in all of his years (he's one of the oldest vampires around), he was just as selfish as Lestat (though in a subtler way.) Zaman was great at highlighting many facets (both goodish and bad) of an already interesting character. He was a lot more manipulative from the start. Not to mention ridic handsome too (like the rest of the cast.)
MADELINE
In the novel and movie, Claudia's a little girl and there's a whole thing abt how Madeline's gonna be the mother that Claudia needed. IIRC, by the time Claudia met her, Madeline had lost a child.
But, in the show, Claudia (who is stuck in the body of a 14-y.o.) and Madeline's dynamic was blurrier. Louis even asked them if they're companions (the way he had been with Lestat and was currently with Armand). Their reply was a little odd: Claudia mulled her answer while Madeline said yes v. enthusiastically. It's pretty much a given that they were lovers. I was like π¬π€πΆ cuz it was playing too fast and loose with lines.
I do think that the (canonical) maternal version of her wasn't gonna be a good fit for TV!Claudia. Ultimately, TV!Madeline was an enigma for me. I think I preferred the movie version over the book or TV one.
SANTIAGO
Book version
Even though he did become a crucial character to the latter part of the novel, I can't say Santiago registered as someone I've kept track of whenever I've picked up the novel.
Movie version
Stephen Rea did the most with the v. few scenes his character was in. His version was a bit more of buffoon that (eventually) turns v. vicious.
TV show version
Ben Daniels was really great in this role. He was devious and fascinating every time he poked at Louis. Their interaction was so yummy because it was tense 99.9% of the time. He also wasn't subtle abt wanting to take over the coven and was, instead, biding his time. Which added a layer of WTF-ry cuz Armand had kinda accepted it?
RAGLAN JAMES
I was v. ??? abt the TV version. Dunno if it was cuz it's Justin Kirk or the sliminess of this version, but I was quite π π½ββοΈ abt him. THAT SAID, I did liked the seeds (so early on) for Book 4. IJS. OJO
At the same time, I finished both seasons still at odds with his tiny!storyline. Was he really in Talamasca OR was it just a con job he was pulling on Daniel?
The Two Main Ships (I acknowledge the OT3, but I'm also kinda neutral abt it, so I'm skipping it this one time.)
Louis/Lestat
OK, this is v. uncool, dare I say problematique of me, but I ultimately loved them. They're TERRIBLE for each other, but the kind of chemistry they've got? FETCH ME MY SMELLING SALTS! I WAS SWEATING WHENEVER THEY GOT ALL LUSTY WITH EACH OTHER!!!
Both actors went for the emotional core of every scene and that heightened the INTENSE AF attraction to each other. ON TOP OF THAT, it was super clear that both actors trusted each other. Neither one was uncomfortable with or reluctant abt the romance or intimacy.
If someone asked me, I wouldn't call them a Power Couple cuz they were so gorram messy and toxic! Frex, the high levels of manipulation from Lestat, pockets of resentment from Louis' perspective, their constant push-and-pull until things got extremely violent. They're deffo NOT #CoupleGoals.
Louis/Armand
In the movie, Louis mentioned that he and Armand had traveled for a while, but that eventually he'd realized that Armand didn't have anything else to offer in terms of wisdom.
In the TV show, he and Louis had been together for around 70 yrs. So they've got their domestic vibes down. You could tell they're together, but it was almost like they were playing-acting as a couple. Instead of being an actual couple. I feel that Armand was always aware that he couldn't (much as he wanted to and tried to) sever the BOND between Louis and Lestat.
See also Louis obsession with Lestat to the point that Armand flat out told him how sick he was of hearing that name. And, by that point, it'd been DECADES into their own relationship.
FORMAT
The TV Show reigned β¨supremeβ¨.
The movie was slightly better than the book. It condensed a lot of the main plot into a 2-hr space while still hitting enough emotional beats.
The book was v. much "of it's time".
Are non-readers missing anything from it if they decide to skip it? I'm gonna say no. In part cuz, compared to the TV show, the book was on a whole 'nother galaxy w/r/t the story arcs. Also, the protags were super chill abt being racist and (in Louis' case) slave owners (π¬). All of this was presented as "it was part of the culture/society at the time." πππ. Also, the writing was V. OTT/flowery.
SETTING
The novel began right as the US became an official republic.
Both movies were set in contemporary times. IWTV had a v. heavy 90s aesthetic. Every time I've watched it, I can't deny a twinge or two of nostalgia. QOTD went into nu-metal vibes that kinda worked? There's a lot of opulence as well. I appreciated it, IDK.
TV show's S1 was set in the Progressive Era (1890s-1920s) which was when so many things like urbanization and certain reforms happened such as when (white) women got the right to vote. Alongside, ofc, as to massive corruption and a lot of the upper classes trying their best to keep the lower classes oppressed, etc.
One thing I didn't catch at first was how quickly WW1 happened in the show (IIRC, it's relegated to one or two eps?) Which was an interesting shorthand for how human events were unimportant to Lestat, Louis, and Claudia.
S2's focus on WW2 and its aftermath was also well done.
PLOT
Book version
Everything was told from Louis' perspective. It dripped with purple prose. There were some parts filled with beautiful writing, high emotions, etc. But Louis did turned out to be something of dud, IMO..
Movie version
It distilled a lot from the canon in a way that made more sense than not. There were whole chunks of mini-storylines (such as the whole deal with Lestat's father) that were swept away. Usually for the better. The movie still managed to tell a good yarn.
TV show
One thing that had me ???? over the past year and a half was seeing ppl pick up the novel after watching the series and criticizing the novel. I came across many reviews where folks mentioned their disappointment at how cheesy the novel was or how certain things (such as Louis owning slaves and running a plantation) had been glossed over thru the years by the Vampire Chronicles and/or Anne Rice fandoms.
They also couldn't believe that so many of the things that made me a fan of the show (such as the topics that the show dives into) didn't exist in the book.
However, after watching the show, those readers' reactions made so much sense! The depth of WTF-ery they must have felt while reading that novel must have been ridic, hahah.
Particularly with how the show wove in themes of race, queerness, politics, community etc. Things that didn't appear in the novel or movie. The fact that Louis was Creole was a big deal. And I loved that there was purpose behind casting a Black British actor for a role. Same as casting Bailey Bass and Delainey Hayes as Claudia. It mattered. Racebending the characters was cool, sure, but it also meant that sooner or later (IF TPTB behind the show really did care abt these changes) would have to address race. And they did in a way that had me SITTING UP EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.
It didn't talk down to viewers. Instead, it invited viewers to reflect on how things were back then and how they're now.
Several of the scenes had Louis trying to explain to Lestat that his reactions (both as a human and, later on, as a vampire) had to do with racist bullshittery. And Lestat didn't get that because he's a white guy. I love that the plot didn't pull away from that point of tension.
Now I'm gonna say something that might upset some, but it's gotta be said: it's been chilling and infuriating to see the way a lot of fans (especially white ppl) have reacted to this show. Cuz some have been upset abt Louis, Claudia, and Armand no longer be white (nevermind that, canonically, Armand wasn't white? But I digress.) Also, there's been a really weird (and I do mean really weird and gross) not-quite-hidden racist push even among ppl who claim to ship Louis/Lestat or Louis/Armand. I guess racist ppl gotta shake out their racist ya-yas for everyone to see? ππ½ππ½ππ½ππ½π π π π
FWIW, the original text still exists. IF ppl want to go and read abt the slaves and the plantation, Louis' white skin, the white genteel ideas of the South (including the idealization of slavery times), it's still there. Same as with the movie and things like the idea that Louis' slaves were respectful and liked him a lot until Lestat showed up.
Whereas in the show, the topics of race, the horrors of slavery, and how both shaped a lot of who Louis was as a human and continued to exist as a vampire were front and center. I truly and deeply appreciated that.
Season 2 Plot Points
* I loved seeing Louis going from someone who was completely at sea, lost, and depressed. His skepticism abt other vampires. Even though he's not for or against the larger conflict in WW 2, it still touched him (and Claudia). Such as the areas they travelled thru had checkpoints and they had to keep coming up with reasons why they're in Europe. There's a point in which Louis was talking on the war to the point that humans' blood tasted wrong, sad, and was full of despair. OTOH, it still fed him and Claudia. OTOH, they were also barely alive themselves because the quality of the blood was so poor. Which, yeah, the bodies, minds, and souls of ppl who live in a constant state of being retraumatized (be it because of war or something else) were gonna be affected. It was a small but great observation. To me, it pointed out the level of detail that the screenwriters went into.
* I liked Louis' journey in S2 as he tried to process two different traumas from two separate times in his life and yet both traumas were interconnected. His determination to keep on surviving once he and Claudia get to Paris. See also him trying to figure out what he really wanted. And this was where Delainey Hayles as Claudia also pushed him in a good way. She asked him something like "who are you now that you're away from Lestat? Who are you if I am (potentially) gone to do my own thing?" I wouldn't quite say he was successful at answering either question, but that made sense to me.
THEN, there's the WHOLE LOTTA MESS of his relationship with Lestat. They were TERRIBLE for each other, but they're also connected, bound in a way that they couldn't even explain. So his psyche was even messing with him with imaginary!Lestat. Such as in ep. 5 when, hundreds of years later, Lestat did reached out to him and, despite being unable to communicate all the way thru, Louis was DESPERATE to hear something from Lestat.
* The Armand that showed up in S2 was HORRIBLE, but in the best way, LOOOOOOOOOOOOL. His backstory included years of abuse and trauma. As one of oldest vampires around, he'd seen so much and didn't even know what to do anymore. His connections to Lestat and Louis are MESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSY to the point I kept going "lorde, here we go with the chaos" every other scene, LOLsob.
I did liked that he never clicked with Claudia.
* The whole thing with Daniel was nasty in the worst way. Starting with how it'd gone back DECADES? I got it cuz Armand was v. sensual and manipulative (derogatory). Assad was amazing in the role, tho. He had off-the-charts chemistry with pretty much everyone.
Just like in S1, I remained frenemies to Daniel. OTOH, he did bring out what needed to be said (such as Lestat having been abusive toward Louis--despite Louis trying the hardest to dismiss that). Also the way Louis, Armand, and Lestat were interconnected in all kinds of ways didn't help Louis any. In certain ways, Daniel did aimed for honesty.
OTOH, I didn't like how much snark he threw whenever the conversation topic was Claudia. I remember this being more obvious in S1, but his reactions abt her were always weird (to me, at least). I'm still not sure if it was a case of him being disturbed abt Claudia's love for violence OR if he was suspicious of Louis' gentler/rose-colored glasses-like recollections of her.
Final Thoughts
I will most deffo continue on w/S3, a.k.a The Vampire Lestat. Although, because of this year's FESTA, I will most likely be abt 3 weeks or so behind everyone else. BTS will always get my attention no matter what.
