Compare & Contrast: Book vs Movie vs Show

[Snow Apple]

I read the first book as a teenager and was bored until Claudia shows up, but I'm interested in rereading now that I'm better at picking up subtext. I need to track down a copy since I gave mine away years ago. All the copies are borrowed from the libraries in my area, probably due to the new series.

[ratSenoL]

I'm enjoying it so far. I LOVED the books, at least the first 2 or 3. The gay innuendo was most definitely there, especially with regard to Lestat!  Anyway, this iteration feels right despite the changes. Bringing the story to to the early 1900s is an interesting choice, but it also frees the showrunner to tell the story without some of the baggage of Reconstruction times. Making the interview itself occur in modern times looks like a great decision so far.  I'm loving Grey Worm's Louis; he's perfect! I haven't quite decided about Reid's Lestat yet, but already he's way, way better than Tom Cruise's Lestat (he didn't come across as Lestat at all until the very last scene). I'll give him a chance. I think Anne would have liked this version as it feels very true to the spirit of the book. I'm looking forward to the next one.

[Proclone]

On 10/3/2022 at 1:40 PM, Linda956 said:

I read Interview With A Vampire when it first came out and have read all the subsequent Vampire Lestat novels by Anne Rice (as well as The Mayfair Witches series). I'm a huge fan, but this bears no resemblance to the book other than the names of the characters and the fact that Louis is giving an interview.  The setting and time period has changed, Louis is black and not a plantation owner with slaves.  Claudia is older, etc..  They have yet to portray Lestat as Anne Rice described him in an interview once ("around six feet tall, white blonde hair and androgynous looking - like David Bowie during his Ziggy Stardust period").  If I just watched this as another vampire series, I would have to say that I'm enjoying it very much, but I simply cannot identify it with the books or the characters in the books at all.  This has been renewed for a second season already, but Louis is only really the main character in the first book.  After that, all the stories are about Lestat.  We also know Claudia's fate after the first book so how long can they drag out the story with these 3 characters?  I would like to see them tackle each book with a new season, as the books do end up in modern day and they always flash back to what happened previously. But how much are they going change each successive book?  I will continue to watch and enjoy this series, but not as Interview With A Vampire, just "A new Vampire series".

I respectfully disagree. Despite changing the time period, and making Louis black, I actually think this is much closer to the spirit of the book than the movie was.  The show so far has been much more faithful to Louis backstory.  The movie cut his brother and Paul's mental health issues.  And I think both Louis and Lestat are in keeping with their characters from the book.  If anything so far I like Louis better...In the show he doesn't have the whiny quality that he did in the book.  I think both the actors for Louis and Lestat are doing a good job so far.

I also can't fault them for making Claudia older.  The film did this too, as Claudia was five in the book and eleven in the movie.  You just can't realistically use a child that young in a production for a bunch of different issues.  Mostly you won't get the performance you want.  You can't get a young child to act like an adult woman.  Dunst did as good a job as you could possible expect, but I don't mind the show casting someone older who looks young if it means a good performance (and not scarring any children).

Don't get wrong, I actually really like the movie, but I think the series is ultimately going to do a better job telling the story closer to Rice's original tale.  We've already gotten hints that they'll explore Lestat's relationships with his mother and Nikki.  It's embracing how queer the books were, while the movie could only make it subtext.  The show has more time to explore the really rich world Rice created.

[dwmarch]

I am pretty sure most of episode 3 is not from the books at all. As I recall, Louis rescued Claudia from some dire living situation but not from an actual fire.

Louis is shown as being pyrokinetic here. That may have come up in later books but Louis was always the vampire who didn't try very hard when it came to his powers. In later books, he receives blood from Lestat (who has received blood from various ancient vampires) so Louis does eventually develop his strengths but as I recall he kind of goes out of his way to not use them whereas Lestat is clearly established as a showoff.

Louis also has a mean streak to him that he didn't have in the books, particularly the way he killed that one character who was trying to buy his brothel.

As for Louis' friend from back in the day, I don't think he exists in the book. It's possible he might but I don't remember.

Lestat is shown using his powers to get all the soldiers to depart and this causes him to bleed from one ear. I don't recall this being an issue in the books although I don't think any of the vampires ever used it on a crowd.

I'm pretty sure the books have the order of feeding the other way around where vampires would only drink from animals if there were no evildoers around they could feed on. Or they would use a crowded room to disguise several "little drinks" which were established last episode.

[Snow Apple]

I just realized that since the show begins in the 1920's, will they still make Claudia start to go nuts after 60 years like in the book? That will be the 1980's or later which doesn't have the same gothic feel of the 1800's or early 1900's.

[nodorothyparker]

Book Louis found Claudia with the body of her dead mother in a plague area and gave into his hunger for human blood, nearly draining her to death. Lestat rescued her from one of the charity hospitals where she had been left and basically gave Louis the choice that he could either let her die as she was too weakened from Louis's attack to survive or make her one of them. It's a neat trick to make both of Claudia's "gentleman parents" culpable for her being trapped forever as a child even if Claudia mostly blames Lestat because she was too young and weak to remember most of the particulars of how it happened. The ending of episode 3 is giving Louis a savior edit, so we'll see whether they choose to paint it strictly in those terms or do a similar muddying up of events.

The show so far has done a fairly decent job of showing that despite what Louis may choose to believe or even tell Daniel that he's not the complete poor put upon innocent in this story. I think it's in Queen of the Damned that one of the other vampires points out that for all of Louis's supposed suffering for humanity, he's also the vampire who turns out to be one of the least discriminating in the long run about who he takes for victims. So he is capable of some real meanness and cruelty even if that's not what he tells himself. I admit that when I first heard about the series to having some misgivings about moving the story up to 1910, but tying Louis's story to the death of Storyville, Jim Crow making a rather ugly comeback in New Orleans politics because of Woodrow Wilson's election, troops being shipped out of New Orleans for World War I, and the coming of Prohibition is combining to make a rather solid portrait of a man who's being pressed on all sides even as he struggles with a dysfunctional relationship and becoming a literal monster who suddenly has the power to do these things. It's much more palatable for TV than the unending mostly passive woe is me that book Louis sometimes seems to devolve into.

At this point in the book, Louis isn't really sure what the full extent of Lestat's powers are or what he really knows about other vampires or their origins. It's one of his ongoing complaints on the page. We're just told that they have the powers to confuse or glamour people, which could mean a whole host of things. We also know by the time we meet the Talamasca guys that they're aware of it even if they're not fully certain of the extent of it either.

[Scarlett45]

19 minutes ago, nodorothyparker said:

I admit that when I first heard about the series to having some misgivings about moving the story up to 1910, but tying Louis's story to the death of Storyville, Jim Crow making a rather ugly comeback in New Orleans politics because of Woodrow Wilson's election, troops being shipped out of New Orleans for World War I, and the coming of Prohibition is combining to make a rather solid portrait of a man who's being pressed on all sides even as he struggles with a dysfunctional relationship and becoming a literal monster who suddenly has the power to do these things. It's much more palatable for TV than the unending mostly passive woe is me that book Louis sometimes seems to devolve into.

This is such I well written passage, I wanted to state that I agree with all of this. 

Louis has his deep flaws but he wants to believe that he is tortured and a victim. At least Lestat seems to own who he is, Louis doesnt have to be a Lestat (nor do I think he wants to be) but I think he should be honest with himself about whom he is.

[amarante]

I never saw the original movie nor read any of the books so I probably lack knowledge of some of the basics of vampire "science"

I did read the original Bram Stoker Dracula book and so my knowledge of the rules were gleaned from that book which had extensive details. Great book by the way as it is the Victorian (or Edwardian) version of soft core porn as much of the horror novels were.

But I digress - did Ann Price completely discard the old "rules" such as killing with a stake through the heart; garlic being a deterrent and crosses being a protection against them. As I recall in the original you had to actually "invite" the vampire into your home - there is a rather long seduction of a virgin in London and how Dracula is invited into her boudoir. 

Dracula had some slaves which weren't quite vampire. As I recall Renfield was the land agent the Count brought under his spell and was the person who handled shipping the coffin with the Count and his native soil to London. 

[dwmarch]

1 hour ago, amarante said:

But I digress - did Ann Price completely discard the old "rules" such as killing with a stake through the heart; garlic being a deterrent and crosses being a protection against them. As I recall in the original you had to actually "invite" the vampire into your home - there is a rather long seduction of a virgin in London and how Dracula is invited into her boudoir. 

Anne Rice vampires aren't bothered by stakes, garlic or crosses and will hang out in churches for the thrill of it. They cannot turn into bats although as they get older they do gain an ability to fly. They are telekinetic, pyrokinetic and telepathic along with greatly heightened senses. They have no issue with mirrors. Fire and sunlight can be fatal to them although a vampire who is old or who has fed on blood of old vampires can increase their resistance to these weaknesses. They can be knocked out by feeding on tainted blood although this will only slow them down for a bit.

[nodorothyparker]

Anne Rice did away with pretty much all the old vampire lore to reinvent most of what you see now in modern fiction. She's unarguably the mother of modern gothic horror/fiction that made vampires sexy and sympathetic as characters rather than two-dimensional movie monsters.  At a number of points through her books, her creations mock a lot of the old vampire superstitions as exactly that. About the only thing you can do is burn them, and even then depending on their age you better scatter the ashes or they'll be back. They may come back as literal charred monsters, but they'll be back.

[amarante]

Thanks for the background. FWIW Count Dracula in the Bram Stoker novel is much more complex and nuanced than the movie treatment although the movie is a real hoot if you have any kind of affection for old movies. 

[peacheslatour]

23 hours ago, amarante said:

Thanks for the background. FWIW Count Dracula in the Bram Stoker novel is much more complex and nuanced than the movie treatment although the movie is a real hoot if you have any kind of affection for old movies. 

I love the Bela Lugosi Dracula just because they decided there would be armadillos in Transylvania.'

[dwmarch]

I see three possibilities:

1. She has an inclination towards self-harm so she may end up doing herself in, as I thought she was trying to do here.
2. Armand may kill her just to make a point which would be a nice counterpart to Lestat's casual "oh, the thing you loved is dead? Isn't that a shame, boo hoo!" from this episode.
3. Since her last diary was in 1945 perhaps she'll get tired of Louis and Lestat and she'll try to get away from it all by moving to a charming little city called Nagasaki.

To keep it on topic, she is very different from the book version although as I recall the book skips over a big chunk of time when Lestat, Louis and Claudia are a big, happy family.

Another big difference is that Anne Rice vampires don't feel sexual arousal in the traditional sense. As I recall, Claudia's frustration was not sexual, it was that she was a woman in mind but a child in body.

I also don't recall any particular type of human blood being better (tastier?) than any other kind. However, the books do establish that the blood of ancient vampires (Akasha, Marius, etc) is particularly delightful to drink and tends to impart visions and new powers. I am curious to see if the show will also highlight this, especially since they have already name-dropped Marius.

The vampires of the show are way more sensitive to racism. I don't recall any specific instances of racism against vampires of color (who are admittedly few and far between) in the books but the vamps did not particularly care what humans thought of them in most cases.

I'm not sure about vampires scaring animals. I don't know if that is from the books or not. I know that when Lestat is injured in the first book he is able to use his telepathic powers to draw animals to him so he can feed on them. Other than that I don't think vampires ever triggered any kind of instinct in animals where the inherent wrongness of the vampire stood out in some way that only animals could detect.

[nodorothyparker]

I admittedly had a ton of misgivings about aging up Claudia, even as I understood the realities of casting for that part, but having now seen the episode it works on a level that's wholly the show's own. Book Claudia is forever a pretty doll, which certainly has its own issues and its own tragedy. This version of Claudia is forever stuck in that in between place where she isn't a child but isn't a woman either, which having kids this age I can tell you is no walk in the park either. Everything is the Worst. Thing. Ever., you feel every damn thing so deeply, and nobody ever takes you seriously but either as an overgrown child or as a problem to be handled.

The first part of this episode showing the trio as the family that the book hints at but never explicitly shows was gorgeous and funny. Bonus for the scenes of the three laughing at Nosferatu. The book tells us they lived together as a family unit for 65 years, a long time in the vampire world, so you know there had to have been some real happiness and genuine feeling there. But you never get all that much sense of it among all of Louis's look at how evil Lestat is, poor poor me narrative. Moving the timeline up and that we never see a diary entry beyond the 1940s, while they seem to have set that first interview pretty firmly in 1973, it seems like we're not going to get quite that much time. But still longer than many mortal marriages and families last.

I did note during the birthday cake scene, sometime around 1922 that Lestat corrects that he's 159 years old. So the show is more or less keeping his timeline intact even if he now has a full century of time unaccounted for between the events of The Vampire Lestat and when this story begins, which is early 1790s in the book and 1910 here. So the show can fill that in however it wants along the way.

On 10/16/2022 at 9:29 PM, WatcherUatl10 said:

I am wondering how they will handle her demise now. She cannot be THAT much younger than Armand was when he was turned, and she can pass for young adult, so the reaction from the other vamps toward Lestat and Louis creating a monster child vampire is kind of out the window.

I think a lot depends on the casting of Armand. Look, I love Antonio Banderas as much as anyone, but the movie completely blew past/ignored what Armand was supposed to be. If the show also goes with Armand as an adult man, then the Claudia issue as vampire too young/too vulnerable to be alone in the world still more or less stands. She'll still always need someone to pose as a parent or guardian. If not, well, there's still the uneven enforcement of the idea that you're not supposed to kill your maker/kill your own kind even though lots of them do it.

[Snow Apple]

4 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

I think a lot depends on the casting of Armand. Look, I love Antonio Banderas as much as anyone, but the movie completely blew past/ignored what Armand was supposed to be. If the show also goes with Armand as an adult man, then the Claudia issue as vampire too young/too vulnerable to be alone in the world still more or less stands. She'll still always need someone to pose as a parent or guardian. If not, well, there's still the uneven enforcement of the idea that you're not supposed to kill your maker/kill your own kind even though lots of them do it.

There are theories floating around that Rashid is Armand. We'll have to see.

Since the show changed a bunch of stuff, I wouldn't mind if the show changes Claudia's fate either. But I doubt she wants to be trapped as a 14 year old forever, the same as book Claudia hated being trapped in the body of a 5 year old.

Edited October 18, 2022 by Snow Apple

[dwmarch]

So we finally meet another vampire and it is indeed one from the books. Bruce, aka "Killer" was in Queen of the Damned as the leader of the Fang Gang, a group of vampire bikers. He has his leather jacket and his motorcycle here in the 20's although QotD's Killer was only shown in modern times. The books never had Claudia and Killer cross paths and I am pretty sure the books never had vampires sexually assaulting each other. Because the pages of Claudia's diary are ripped out we don't find out what happened to Killer so it is possible he might show up again. IIRC, he is toasted by Akasha in the books along with Baby Jenks (another young vampire, probably closer in age to Claudia as depicted in the show) and the rest of the Fang Gang. Louis is adamant about not wanting to talk about it so I am guessing the story wasn't "he hurt her, we killed him".

Lestat can definitely fly and it seems Louis and Claudia cannot. Again as I recall, Lestat could not fly until QotD when Akasha taught him how.

Claudia also cannot make other vampires. I don't recall if she tried in the book although I am pretty sure there have been failed attempts in at least one of the novels.

The powers of the vampires fluctuate according to story needs. In the novels, Claudia would never be able to hide body parts and a half-dead guy in Lestat's house. He would smell the bodies and hear the dude. FWIW, I think the show hung a tiny lampshade on this in an early episode where Lestat says he often forgets that he can read minds. So maybe smells and sounds are just background noise to him but I still thought it was odd.

Lestat also forgets he can hypnotize people. This was trivial in the novels and gave him a bloody nose as depicted earlier in the season. He does not need to explain himself to the authorities, he can make them go away. I'll allow it because it was a rare opportunity for him to work together with Louis in solving a problem without cheating.

Speaking of powers, Louis has the ability to make Daniel's medical condition worse. This is new. The novel vampires could definitely use telekinesis to fuck somebody up but they never did it in this way. However, there are instances of vampires turning somebody to save them from a terminal illness or grievous injury. I am pretty sure Daniel is turned in Queen of the Damned although I don't recall the exact circumstances. There's a lot going on in that book.

Vampires telepathically calling out to other vampires in the manner of a radio broadcast is shown here. The vampire bush telegraph is a plot point in some of the later novels.

Louis accuses Lestat of only reading the first ten pages of a book. I think Louis is just talking some shit here because as established in the books (and hinted at in the show by the piles of books) vampires can read a book cover to cover as fast as they can turn the pages and they have excellent recall. So I think Lestat reads the books, he just doesn't care. And in my opinion, getting ten pages into a book and deciding it is not worth your time is a perfectly valid way to read. Reading is not supposed to be a grind!

We get another mention in modern times of angry vampires looking for an excuse for conflict. Apparently if Daniel goes ahead and publishes the novel this is what is anticipated. But in the books as I recall, Interview With the Vampire was laughed at or dismissed. It wasn't until Lestat's book The Vampire Lestat that other vampires started getting upset. And the reason for that was because Lestat was taking ancient secrets (such as Akasha) and turning them into public spectacle.

When Louis says he wants to go to Paris, he gets a flat NO from Lestat which I thought was a nice touch. Lestat also mentions that European vampires are more savage. There is a scene in the original novel where Louis and Claudia go to Europe and encounter feral vampires. If this is what Lestat was referring to, it's a deep cut because these feral vamps never show up again. Of course this could also be a reference to Armand and his coven whom I assume we will encounter sooner or later.

[nodorothyparker]

I'll admit this one is a much harder episode to swallow than anything else the showrunners have reimagined up to this point. As always, I try to reserve a certain amount of judgment to see how something plays out before I declare something terrible, but that hellacious domestic fight turned knockdown dragout really felt like the show forgot some things. Namely, that while there's certainly a fair bit of cruelty and abusive behavior in Louis and Lestat's relationship, albeit we're never quite sure exactly how much or on what end because of the shifting POV's and sometimes unreliable narrators. it's a lot more mental and emotional and less clear cut than just beating the hell out of each other or in this case damn near killing Louis. Making it so clearly one-sided here is going to make Lestat as the closest thing this series has to one main character or Louis and Lestat as one of its only long running relationships a much much harder sell going forward. The books get away with a lot by simply reframing things from different POVs and basically agreeing to disagree.  That the two characters keep returning to each other over the years makes it possible to gloss over a lot as, well, maybe it wasn't quite as much as the telling would have you believe at the time since they clearly don't see it that way. Which I realize it's entirely possible that that's what the show is doing here and we just can't see it yet. Nevertheless, presenting it this way also paints Claudia trying to kill Lestat in much simpler black and white terms, as a sort of justified self defense. Book and movie Lestat is assy and controlling, but you're never as sure in either book or movie if she was fully in the right in jumping to the most extreme action possible considering what the consequences end up being for her.

I did wonder last episode when the show made Louis's part in the making of Claudia so much more removed and indirect (even if he admits to her that his killing of the corrupt alderman and hanging him on the gates of Jackson Square led to the firebombing of her neighborhood) how this was going to look heading into Claudia trying to kill Lestat. In both the book and movie, Louis is a pretty passive bystander when it happens as he's not really involved as much as he's Claudia's accomplice after the fact. But in this version, Louis too has full justification if he's more actively involved. If this isn't a shifting POV situation, this is one that's going to be much harder to come back from with the audience.

Edit to add: Someone elsewhere pointed out that we've now seen Louis be extremely defensive and protective of Claudia's memory, to the point that some of his answers seem shifty and evasive. Is it likely that he's framing what probably was a hellacious domestic fight in terms that would make what comes next look justified to Daniel? That actually would be in line with the book POV before Lestat gives us his version of events in The Vampire Lestat.

[Glade]

Louis and Rashid are really hot together when they're intimate, and I guess now all theories that Rashid is a vampire (whether it was Armand, Lestat via the body thief, David Talbot, or the Rashid from Blood and Gold that he was supposed to be) are disproven as of episode 5. He is a human companion offering himself to Louis freely.

I could not undrop my jaw after seeing what Grace pulled out. THE BURN is so extreme! And what an inversion of that scene in the novel where Louis watches an elderly Grace place flowers on his grave from a distance...though I think they could have tried to age Grace a little bit for this scene, it was...wow. Goodbye Grace.  But it was really touching that Claudia also narrated her reaction when watching this scene, picking up on the nuanced depth of her parent's emotional life for the first time. Beautifully adapted from book to screen!

The ending was also shocking, I can only imagine this will be re-contextualized later on, but it's a lot.

[peacheslatour]

Quote

Claudia also cannot make other vampires. I don't recall if she tried in the book although I am pretty sure there have been failed attempts in at least one of the novels.

I must be remembering wrong. I thought Claudia "made" Madeline?

[Ohiopirate02]

8 minutes ago, peacheslatour said:

I must be remembering wrong. I thought Claudia "made" Madeline?

I remember Louis doing that as a parting gift to Claudia.  Claudia knew Louis was enamored with Armand and there was no place for her in Paris with Louis, so she asked Louis to make her a companion.  But, I will confess that I have not read the book in decades and I may be remembering the movie here.

[nodorothyparker]

That's correct. Unless I'm remembering wrong, Madeline is the only vampire Louis "made" and only under duress from his guilt over knowing Claudia can't be left alone in the world because she's physically such a small child. Claudia muses about it, at one point suggesting she could make an army of vampire children (which is supposedly Rice's first draft of what to do with the character), but because of her size she never successfully turns anyone. As much as I'm mostly enjoying this aged up version of Claudia, that's a point that doesn't really make much sense with an almost adult sized teenager. 

[Snow Apple]

6 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

That's correct. Unless I'm remembering wrong, Madeline is the only vampire Louis "made" and only under duress from his guilt over knowing Claudia can't be left alone in the world because she's physically such a small child. Claudia muses about it, at one point suggesting she could make an army of vampire children (which is supposedly Rice's first draft of what to do with the character), but because of her size she never successfully turns anyone. As much as I'm mostly enjoying this aged up version of Claudia, that's a point that doesn't really make much sense with an almost adult sized teenager. 

Right? When she dressed up and told Charlie she was 18, I can see it. A 14 year old can go out in the world alone by claiming she's an adult who just look young. Book Claudia can't do that, which makes her character so much more sad and horrifying than the show version.

Edited October 25, 2022 by Snow Apple

[Scarlett45]

I wonder if the writers of the series were trying to say that a person (especially a woman) alone is vulnerable, even if she is a vampire. Claudia never would had to fear human men before, but when she was assaulted and raped by that other vampire (what a betrayal, she was so happy to finally meet another vampire, who intervened with that racist prick) she must’ve been so scared. I can see how that made her want to go back and get Louis who did care about her. 
 

Book Claudia was physically vulnerable because she was a small child, this Claudia is still a woman, and a person alone. If there are more vampires out there, she and Louis are better off traveling together. 
 

Lestat, ugh he’s such a prick. “I love you don’t leave me.” This is classic abuser behavior!

[nodorothyparker]

Vulnerability in isolation is such a running theme throughout the series. We're given example after example of the lengths various vampires will go to not to be alone and the madness and self destruction that often ensues when they can't form lasting connections. The character of Maharet will make this very point in Queen of the Damned, that she's the rare vampire who endured for 6,000 years without ever losing herself or needing to go to ground precisely because she found her lodestar in deeply maintaining connections with her own descendants and legacy across the centuries. The way Rice writes about the ache of loneliness and feeling cut off from humanity around you for whatever reason was such a huge draw for so many people struggling with that whether we realized it or not at the time.

I'm really fascinated by how much of Lestat's Vampire Lestat backstory they're bringing into episode 5. Book Louis and Claudia never hear this story and it's only well after the Louis and Claudia in Paris story wraps up that Louis is told the bare bones of it to realize that Lestat really wasn't withholding as much as he'd been orphaned in the world with little to go on but what he could figure out on his own. I hope that means we're not going to skip showing it as the series progresses because there's some really interesting writing there in the story of Magnus, who was driven near mad by his isolation and went through a whole gruesome bit of trial and error before finally making Lestat in a last-ditch effort to leave something behind so that his centuries of existence would mean something. All the abuser/dysfunction dynamic aside, the show really did nail that Lestat, for all his bravado and believing he's just above everything, is one who really can't bear his own company for any real length of time or do well at all on his own. Sam Reid has been a revelation in selling that.

I still don't buy the theory that Rashid is Armand, but ending on the San Francisco flashback I am now really curious who or what he's going to turn out to be.

[dwmarch]

So we get a Magnus name drop and it's the same story as in the books. Interesting that Lestat tells Claudia and Louis that Magnus jumped into a fire. I'm pretty sure up to this point they didn't actually know how vulnerable they were to fire. Louis certainly didn't seem to mind running into a burning building.

I'm still curious who taught Lestat how to fly. I guess it could have been Akasha. In The Vampire Lestat, Lestat is able to wake her up with music but Enkil is not happy about this and Marius hustles Lestat away. But this series will take events from the books and stretch them out so it's possible we'll see some adventures with Akasha in a later season. Or maybe they'll just keep it simple and say Marius or Armand taught him.

We also get a mention here about how Lestat is aware of Bruce aka Killer. This actually fits somewhat better than I initially thought. In QotD, Lestat tells various stories of other vampires via a third-person narrative. So he did know of Killer despite not meeting him. I'm assuming these stories are visions he had courtesy of Akasha's blood but they could also be from vampire telepathic radio which is how Lestat knows of him in this episode.

I'm not sure what to make of Rashid. There is some Hollywood trickery going on here, at least compared to dreams I have had. I have never had a dream that was straight flashback. Familiar locations, faces and situations, sure but the details are set to random. Daniel on the other hand seems to have recovered a memory that was lost in a drug-induced haze. But this comes to him in REM sleep which I don't think it how it works except on TV. So Rashid theoretically should just be a side character in a weird dream. But we wouldn't see it at the end of an episode unless it was meant to be some shocking revelation. And since Rashid hasn't aged a day since then, he must be a vampire too. But which one? Armand is around the same age as Claudia and wouldn't be able to get into a bar. Marius wouldn't pretend like this, he's a straight shooter.

[nodorothyparker]

Book Lestat can't fly until after his time away with Akasha in Queen of the Damned. It's one of the powers he gains after regular access to her very powerful blood. The books are consistent on that point, that Lestat is not your average 200-year-old fledging both because he never had to do his time in a maker-subservient relationship because of Magnus's suicide and that he's had access to a lot of very powerful blood through Akasha and Marius in his travels. A lot of fans elsewhere have been bemoaning that by moving that power and the reveal of it to here that we lose the end of QoftD where Lestat shows off his new powers to an awestruck Louis to travel to go mindfuck a then still mortal David. That scene is a sentimental favorite for a lot of longtime readers.

It's interesting in light of their "no more secrets" clause that is supposed to include no more omissions, Lestat still doesn't seem to have clued Louis or Claudia in that drinking from more powerful vampires is this universe's equivalent of a cheat code to become stronger, gain more powers, or even just heal faster. I would have halfway expected that to be part of Lestat's wooing to get Louis to take him back during his long recovery: let me back in and my blood can insta heal you.

I can't remember now if we're ever told the name of the side vampire Lestat makes as the situation with Louis and Claudia at home is deteriorating, but I want to say he was a male musician Lestat had a passing infatuation with that Lestat held over Claudia's head as a "better vampire than you." Antoinette is apparently playing the gender swap of that role, which is a rather thankless one amid the twisted family dynamic.

[Snow Apple]

Did Claudia hide bodies (or parts) around the house in the book? I don't remember.

In the movie, I know Claudia hid the body of a woman in her mountain of dolls but that's because she wants to be a grown woman and frustrated by her child's body. I don't know the reason she's doing it in episode 5 but I missed the first 10 minutes.

[dwmarch]

I tend to post here rather than the episode threads since the things that stand out to me the most are from the books. Some interesting things in Episode 7.

First and foremost, Those Who Must Be Kept! We get a slip-up from Lestat who mentions them when thinking about Greece. This matches their first appearance in The Vampire Lestat where Marius is indeed keeping them on an island in the Mediterranean. Interesting that at this point Lestat has already encountered them. I'm pretty sure in the books he doesn't encounter them until after Louis and Claudia go off to Europe.

So Rashid is Armand after all. This is entirely new. Armand does have a connection to Daniel in the books but it wasn't from being Louis' pretend butler. As for Armand's sunlight immunity, that's actually somewhat consistent with the books but only because Anne Rice retconned Armand's "death" in Memnoch the Devil. Basically Armand saw evidence of a miracle and went into the sunlight. He was supposed to be dead. But Anne Rice wasn't finished with him yet so she wrote a later story where he unconsciously flew off to someplace shaded where he could recover. Speaking of flying, we finally get an answer to that floating bookshelf and the answer is yes, it is indeed every bit as inconvenient as it looks on purpose.

We had a list of how vampires could die and again they are repeating the idea about drinking "dead" blood which doesn't fully make sense to me. Louis also says starvation is fatal which is not true in the books. Starved vampires go into a state of hibernation but when they want to come out of it they can call animals to themselves to feed on. They even called that out in this episode with Daniel mentioning the fat rats at the dump. Ancient vampires like Akasha and Enkil do not feed at all. I'm not sure about beheading. I know it has been used in some of the books (The Vampire Vittorio in particular) but I feel like it isn't fatal in and of itself. I want to say there is a vampire who has had their head put back on but I'm not sure. I know vampires can have limbs reattached without issue and Maharet was using eyes from humans (as her original eyes were gouged out before she was made into a vampire) and that didn't quite work but when she received an eye transplant from another vampire she was all set.

[nodorothyparker]

Damn. That may have been the most anticlimactic ending since Game of Thrones bombed out so spectacularly in the final stretch. The whole effect of yet another miscast "Armand" floating around and so baldly declaring himself was cheesy and stupid for a show that's otherwise been fairly smart and elegant in its choices, the occasional bloodbath notwithstanding. Apparently I'm going to have to wait for yet another adaptation to finally see someone do Armand justice because this isn't it anymore than Antonio Banderas was. I'm genuinely disappointed. 

[Snow Apple]

I haven't watched the 7th episode. 

I'm not feeling as sorry for Claudia as I think I'm supposed to. Yes she's trapped by Lestat because he wants Louis to be happy instead of mopey, but without that issue, she's free to come and go as she wish since she can pass as an older teen (or she can tell people she's young looking). She went on a date, go out wandering the town by herself, and she even traveled during the university tour. Nobody will question her like they would Book Claudia. 

Louis really needs to let her go. It's not like she can't come back to visit him. 

Edited November 7, 2022 by Snow Apple

[SevenStars]

On 11/7/2022 at 8:41 AM, Snow Apple said:

I haven't watched the 7th episode. 

I'm not feeling as sorry for Claudia as I think I'm supposed to. Yes she's trapped by Lestat because he wants Louis to be happy instead of mopey, but without that issue, she's free to come and go as she wish since she can pass as an older teen (or she can tell people she's young looking). She went on a date, go out wandering the town by herself, and she even traveled during the university tour. Nobody will question her like they would Book Claudia. 

Louis really needs to let her go. It's not like she can't come back to visit him. 

Louis did let her go. It was Lestat who went and force her back into the fold because he was afraid Louis would kill himself without Claudia there to give him some happiness. Lestat basically ignoring/ don't  know that Louis' depression is the reason he wants to kill himself and Claudia can't fix his depression. Claudia is trap because Lestat made sure she knew that if she left, he would do worst to her than Bruce did and Claudia believed him with good reason after what he did to Louis. 

[Ohiopirate02]

6 hours ago, SevenStars said:

Louis did let her go. It was Lestat who went and force her back into the fold because he was afraid Louis would kill himself without Claudia there to give him some happiness. Lestat basically ignoring/ don't  know that Louis' depression is the reason he wants to kill himself and Claudia can't fix his depression. Claudia is trap because Lestat made sure she knew that if she left, he would do worst to her than Bruce did and Claudia believed him with good reason after what he did to Louis. 

For me, I find that the show is not doing a great job of showing Louis's depression and self-hatred.  If I had not read the books ages ago or seen the movie, I would have no idea that Louis is depressed.  

[Snow Apple]

7 hours ago, SevenStars said:

Louis did let her go. It was Lestat who went and force her back into the fold because he was afraid Louis would kill himself without Claudia there to give him some happiness. Lestat basically ignoring/ don't  know that Louis' depression is the reason he wants to kill himself and Claudia can't fix his depression. Claudia is trap because Lestat made sure she knew that if she left, he would do worst to her than Bruce did and Claudia believed him with good reason after what he did to Louis. 

Right, but I mean he needs to let go emotionally; let her know he will be alright if she leave as long as she come back for visits. I know. Easier said than done. Who can help but be depressed with Lestat for an abusive domestic partner. Like Daniel said, she's a band aid. 

You are right that he technically let her leave but she and Lestat both know he can't live without her. That's why she tried to hide leaving from Lestat.

Edited November 10, 2022 by Snow Apple

[Scarlett45]

31 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

For me, I find that the show is not doing a great job of showing Louis's depression and self-hatred.  If I had not read the books ages ago or seen the movie, I would have no idea that Louis is depressed.  

I think the show is doing a good job. Claudia wants to go out and see the world, meet other vampires. Louis didn't want to go with her, not because he loves Lestat/wants to stay in NOLA (they need to make plans to go NOW, they are not aging and people are noticing, its time to bounce, the neighbors know they are cursed), or he doesn't want to be with Claudia, Louis thinks he DESERVES this miserable existence with Lestat. Although it took him 6yrs (not long in vampire world, but Louis hasn't been a vampire that long, so its a while for him) Louis took Lestat back. But Louis does love Claudia like he loved his sister, so he wants her to be free.

1 minute ago, Snow Apple said:

Right, but I mean he needs to let go emotionally; let her know he will be alright if she leave as long as she come back for visits. I know. Easier said than done. Who can help but be depressed with Lestat for an abusive domestic partner. Like Daniel said, she's a band aid. 

Oh I see what you mean. Yup. Louis is flawed too. (granted I haven't seen episode 7 yet)

[Irlandesa]

1 hour ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

For me, I find that the show is not doing a great job of showing Louis's depression and self-hatred.  If I had not read the books ages ago or seen the movie, I would have no idea that Louis is depressed.  

As a non-book reader, the self hatred part may not be as strong (but it's there) but the depression certainly is.

[Jeebus Cripes]

On 11/6/2022 at 9:50 AM, dwmarch said:

We had a list of how vampires could die and again they are repeating the idea about drinking "dead" blood which doesn't fully make sense to me. Louis also says starvation is fatal which is not true in the books. Starved vampires go into a state of hibernation but when they want to come out of it they can call animals to themselves to feed on. They even called that out in this episode with Daniel mentioning the fat rats at the dump. Ancient vampires like Akasha and Enkil do not feed at all. I'm not sure about beheading. I know it has been used in some of the books (The Vampire Vittorio in particular) but I feel like it isn't fatal in and of itself. I want to say there is a vampire who has had their head put back on but I'm not sure. I know vampires can have limbs reattached without issue and Maharet was using eyes from humans (as her original eyes were gouged out before she was made into a vampire) and that didn't quite work but when she received an eye transplant from another vampire she was all set.

It's been forever since I've read the books. I thought the dead blood thing was something made up for the film and absent from the novels but couldn't remember exactly. It's a strange thing to carry over to the series, unless they want to paint it as Lestat lying to them. 

On 11/6/2022 at 8:34 PM, nodorothyparker said:

Damn. That may have been the most anticlimactic ending since Game of Thrones bombed out so spectacularly in the final stretch. The whole effect of yet another miscast "Armand" floating around and so baldly declaring himself was cheesy and stupid for a show that's otherwise been fairly smart and elegant in its choices, the occasional bloodbath notwithstanding. Apparently I'm going to have to wait for yet another adaptation to finally see someone do Armand justice because this isn't it anymore than Antonio Banderas was. I'm genuinely disappointed. 

I share your disappointment in this Armand. Will any vampire other than Lestat be close to source material? I was very forgiving of the changes to Louis, and I begrudgingly tolerated what they did to Claudia by aging her, but now this version of Armand has me pissed off all over again. Aside from the fact that he shares no physical characteristics with book Armand, the dynamic between him and Louis with this master/servant routine is weird as hell. I remember this being the case with Armand and Marius and being uncomfortable with it then because of his age. Age not being an issue here, because god forbid we see a teenaged Armand on screen in my lifetime, I don't understand why the hell this ancient vampire would be fawning all over young Louis like this. If it's all an act for Daniel's benefit it still strikes me odd. I guess the writers wanted to pull one over on the book fans, but they took so many liberties that instead of being clever it feels stupid and contrived. And from what I recall, Daniel and Armand were a couple in the books which adds another layer of WTF to it all. I suppose he won't be responsible for Claudia's death here. 

Contrary to that disappointing turn, I did enjoy the reveal that Lestat's side dish was listening in on all the scheming. I thought that was handled well because I absolutely forgot all about her and got all wrapped up in the murder plot. Shame about Armand ruining what I otherwise thought was a fantastic season finale. 

[Scarlett45]

19 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

As a non-book reader, the self hatred part may not be as strong (but it's there) but the depression certainly is.

I think the clearest bit of self hatred we say was when Louis was tempted to eat his nephew and was disgusted with himself. He blamed Lestat for the fact that he’d never have kids of his own and his family hated him. 

[Jeebus Cripes]

Okay, the more I ruminate on the finale, the more I'm convinced Armand is controlling Louis' mind and has tampered with his memories or maybe even implanted shit that never happened. Louis' smile at the end when he announced "the love of my life" was weird as hell, and I find it super strange that a vampire would have such a shitty memory. At first I thought he was just lying to Daniel and getting caught but that moment where his recollection of the night he and his friend hooked up in the bayou was called into question, he seemed to genuinely not remember if it was raining and that struck me odd at the time. Mind control is the only thing that makes sense to me now.

My question is, can vampires push other vamps in the books like this? I can't recall this being a thing but haven't read them in probably twenty years. 

[magdalene]

5 hours ago, Jeebus Cripes said:

Okay, the more I ruminate on the finale, the more I'm convinced Armand is controlling Louis' mind and has tampered with his memories or maybe even implanted shit that never happened. Louis' smile at the end when he announced "the love of my life" was weird as hell, and I find it super strange that a vampire would have such a shitty memory. At first I thought he was just lying to Daniel and getting caught but that moment where his recollection of the night he and his friend hooked up in the bayou was called into question, he seemed to genuinely not remember if it was raining and that struck me odd at the time. Mind control is the only thing that makes sense to me now.

My question is, can vampires push other vamps in the books like this? I can't recall this being a thing but haven't read them in probably twenty years. 

Well, I just finished The Vampire Lestat and in it Lestat meets Armand for the first time.  Armand tries to bring Lestat under his control and it took every ounce of will power Lestat has to resist him. Both the book source and the TV adaptation present Lestat as very strong-willed and he struggled with Armand. I don't think Louis has a chance against Armand.

[Jeebus Cripes]

12 hours ago, magdalene said:

Well, I just finished The Vampire Lestat and in it Lestat meets Armand for the first time.  Armand tries to bring Lestat under his control and it took every ounce of will power Lestat has to resist him. Both the book source and the TV adaptation present Lestat as very strong-willed and he struggled with Armand. I don't think Louis has a chance against Armand.

Damn, I have no memory of this. It's definitely time for me to plow through these books again. Someone told me Armand and Louis were together for some time and I must've blocked this out as well. I was never that keen on Armand. 

[Ohiopirate02]

7 hours ago, Jeebus Cripes said:

Damn, I have no memory of this. It's definitely time for me to plow through these books again. Someone told me Armand and Louis were together for some time and I must've blocked this out as well. I was never that keen on Armand. 

I'm in the same boat, I vaguely remember Louis being enamored with Armand and he does spend some years with him after Claudia's death.  But, between Armand being complicit with the execution of Claudia and Madeline and Loius being Louis, they eventually separate.   I plan on rereading the first book or 3 soon.  Amazon has the first 3 books in an omnibus ebooj for $11.

[magdalene]

The thing is in The Vampire Lestat Armand looks the age of a boy, a child really. He and his coven are chasing Lestat and his mother.  They are terrifying.   Armand is a very old vampire but you certainly can not tell this from his physical appearance. That's why I am shaking my head who they  cast in both the movie and the TV series.  Lestat says Armand looks like a boy in a Caravaggio painting several times.

[Scarlett45]

On 11/12/2022 at 6:01 AM, Jeebus Cripes said:

Okay, the more I ruminate on the finale, the more I'm convinced Armand is controlling Louis' mind and has tampered with his memories or maybe even implanted shit that never happened. Louis' smile at the end when he announced "the love of my life" was weird as hell, and I find it super strange that a vampire would have such a shitty memory. At first I thought he was just lying to Daniel and getting caught but that moment where his recollection of the night he and his friend hooked up in the bayou was called into question, he seemed to genuinely not remember if it was raining and that struck me odd at the time. Mind control is the only thing that makes sense to me now.

My question is, can vampires push other vamps in the books like this? I can't recall this being a thing but haven't read them in probably twenty years. 

Yeah something is right here and Armand gives me the creeps. The actor is doing a good job though. 

[magdalene]

On 10/12/2022 at 11:09 AM, dwmarch said:

and will hang out in churches for the thrill of it.

Lestat loves being in churches. Certain other vampires have a superstition against them  and Lestat escapes into churches  a number of times.  He also goes to ground in them to be safe. 

I found this interesting article and I am putting the link in here because it seems too spoilery for the media thread.

https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/interview-with-the-vampire-finale-louis-kills-lestat-armand-revealed-1235429315/

I learned a few things from the article.  Don't expect some romantic reunion between Louis and Lestat in season 2.  While Lestat is alive the relationship they had seems to be dead. Which is probably for the best as it was very toxic.  The second season will focus on Louis, Claudia and Armand in Paris. But also use material from book 2, 3 and 6. So Sam Reid won't sit the season out.

I learned something fascinating, there is a later book in which Lestat falls in love with Rowan, the witch from that upcoming AMC witches series. So maybe eventually we will get some crossover?  If this show lasts long enough, it's probably too queer for AMC mainstream audiences, I fear.

I will be grateful if they get a third season..

[Anela]

I loved the one book, and the first one in the Witch series (I think). I haven't read every single one of her books, but those I did read, I didn't like. I read Interview, when I was a teenager, and the movie was being made. 

[dwmarch]

My personal favorites are The Vampire Lestat and The Queen of the Damned. I also enjoyed Blood and Gold, Pandora and Vittorio the Vampire. I can take or leave the rest.

[Linda956]

It's been a while since I read all the Vampire Chronicles books but I do seem to remember that Louis was really only the major character in the first book.  After that, Lestat was the main character.  Yes, Louis and many other vampires (Marius , Armand, etc.)  were in those books and I do seem to recall that Louis spent his time with Armand because they were a couple.  I think the books focused on Lestat because he was such a popular character and the others were simply supporting players.  I'm very curious to see what they do in Season 2.  Will they follow the book in terms of Claudia's fate when she and Louis go to Paris and come upon the Theatre of the Vampires?

[nodorothyparker]

22 hours ago, magdalene said:

I learned a few things from the article.  Don't expect some romantic reunion between Louis and Lestat in season 2.  While Lestat is alive the relationship they had seems to be dead. Which is probably for the best as it was very toxic.  The second season will focus on Louis, Claudia and Armand in Paris. But also use material from book 2, 3 and 6. So Sam Reid won't sit the season out.

In all fairness, this first season only got to the halfway point of the first novel. If the show stays at all faithful to the books, Lestat does appear in the back half but he and Louis won't reconcile until late in The Vampire Lestat. There's a lot of ground to cover between where they left it and that point.

I'm still not happy about casting another thirtysomething to play Armand and probably never will be, but I'm going to try to reserve some judgement until we see the actor play off Sam Reid. Lestat and Armand have a very fraught history even before you get into who has custody of Louis.

[magdalene]

3 hours ago, Linda956 said:

Will they follow the book in terms of Claudia's fate when she and Louis go to Paris and come upon the Theatre of the Vampires?

I am curious about that too.  Since  they actually changed who "kills" Lestat in the show.

[Snow Apple]

15 hours ago, magdalene said:

I am curious about that too.  Since  they actually changed who "kills" Lestat in the show.

I'm curious too. I've posted before that if Claudia meets the same fate, they could have hired a real child. Even a real 13 or 14 year old since the scenes are more graphic than the movie and may be too much for a younger child. A 19 year old actress most likely won't change too much in the next few years.