I always post my analyses for AMC's Interview with the Vampire under the IWTV TVC Metas tag, but I also have masterlists in the menu on my front page, where everything's listed, latest to oldest.
Louis Metas1 (S1 - S2 | S3)
General Metas2 (S1 - S2 | S3): inc. my Anne Rice books tier list | AMC / TVC Timelines | S2 & S3 episode reactions | AMC's Book/Research References for S1, S2, & xtras
Claudia / Armand Metas3 (S1 - S2 | S3)
Lestat / Gabrielle Metas4 (S1 - S2 | S3)
Over time I've had to split them into 4 parts cuz of Tumblr's hyperlink limit--they used to all be in one nice & neat post, pre-Season 2. 😔
Disclaimer: I'm a Black goth female who's been reading Anne Rice for 30 years. I stan AMC!Louis & AMC!Claudia. Antiblack racists & misogynists can kick bricks. 😘
(Lies & slander about me that I refuted with RECEIPTS: x x)
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Ugh, this is hard. They're like the same dang outfit, so do I give it to the hallucination of the first the time Lestat blew Louis' back out raw, or to his wedding day/suicide prevention? 🤔
NGL although his face was literal NIGHTMARE FUEL WIPE YOUR MOUTH PLEASE, I really like the demonic trench coat though.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
This Vulture reviewer is SO off the mark (not just about this topic; but up & down the article). I just need to clear things up, since clearly folks are confused AF at how power dynamics actually work here. 🙄
1) Christine Claire is NOT whoring out Lestat
She does not own him; he does not owe her any debt. She is NOT his pimp, she's his EMPLOYEE. She is his LAWYER shark (and an incredibly unethical, offensive, & hypocritical degenerate). Yeah, she's bossy AF (she's in charge of The Brand™), but she's not HIS boss (paying HIS salary/bills/etc).
Yes, as Lestat's lawyer, it's her job to dictate certain actions he takes, in order to stop him from doing anything dangerously stupid that might get him SUED into oblivion or ARRESTED--and put her out of a JOB. It's her job to make sure he pays as little money to anyone as possible, and to weasel him out of any sticky situations, even if he IS at fault.
Because "Thomas Pitt" was threatening to SUE Lestat for damages to the hotel, Christine legally had to agree to the meeting ("That's your job, lover." "I'm doing my job, motherf*r."). The "exclusive fan experience" was compulsory--it's part of the litigious threat, that things would get worse if Lestat wasn't present so "Pitt" could negotiate with him face-to-face. "Do I HAVE to "f**k him?" Do I HAVE to show up to the meeting & do what Pitt says? "YES." It's a LEGAL dispute, not a literal sexual hookup. Christine's not "whoring" Lestat out to anyone for her own benefit--it's for HIS benefit. He MUST go to PRIVATE 2-on-2 meeting and agree to "Pitt's" terms if he doesn't want the CIVIL lawsuit escalated to the PUBLIC COURTROOM in front of a JUDGE. 💀 Settle this out of COURT and do the sit-down whether you want to or not.
2) Louis is NOT whoring Lestat out by owning 45% of his merch
This detail got leaked so many months ago and people were talking about it, Omg, Pimp Louis owns Lestat's band, Louis owns Lestat, omg~! NO. Getting a cut of merch profits is NOT the same as owning Lestat or his band. Louis is NOT in charge of Lestat's band or own them in any way shape or form. He doesn't even manufacture or distribute the merch--he's a SHAREHOLDER who just gets a (very large) cut of whatever's bought & sold, because he helps financially back the businesses that DO make/promote/sell the merch. If anything, it actually proves that FlopStat's TVL Brand™ was next to worthless when Lestat was starting up, that no other investors stepped forward with competitive interest in his merch at all, to outbid Louis' 45%. 💀
Because Lestat IS a flop & doesn't sell out venues, the band's not making much money in ticket sales (let alone album sales). So the merch (which is a separate money source from tickets & album sales BTW!) becomes their main nest egg. All shareholders get a cut of merch sales, them's the brakes--and you can have plenty of shareholders backing merch. But the "nightmarish situation" Lestat's in wrt Louis claiming darn near half his merch profits is that no matter how much money the band makes off of merch sales, half of it's going into LOUIS of all people's pockets for backing it in the first place.
The same guy their songs are cussing out & defaming & slandering is PROFITING off the tour--not thru the songs/albums themselves or the tickets, but thru the MERCH. So every time Lestat's face/logo is plastered anywhere, he's just making Louis money. 😎🤑
This is really long, and kind of stream-of-conscious breaking down story-telling elements and purpose. I get a little frustrated at the end of it, but that's most of us who are trying to make sense of the series at the point, I think.
Okay so I keep thinking about story structure. TV shows - especially ones written like this - follow a specifical story-telling formula.
The Base Story is the overall arc of the season. That story is one long and extended story and is not complete until the end. Unreliable narrators as a narrative device especially mean that the story is overwhelmingly incomplete until the end, which will usually contain a keystone to gather up all the inconceivable threads that were left loose earlier. Seasons 1 and 2 were technically one long season interrupted in the middle, which is why 2x08 acts as the keystone, rather than 1x07 acting as the first, and 2x08 as the second.
However, this series is also written by playwrights, which means they are telling each episode as an ACT. Each episode is contained in its own conversation with itself, and not just about chronological event displaying. 2x04, for example, was about roles and casting each character into their preferred role and how that created tension with the role they *should* be playing. I talk about that specifically in this post breaking down Armand threatening Santiago, and it is the background of the tension in this post where I talk about Gothic Rain in the bench scene and how storytelling-motifs reflect tone.
So we can take the same approach to Season 3. We don't have the key to address the whole series yet, but we can ask what each act is for, and how that builds on the act before it.
3X01 operates as the opening act. It is laying down the fundamentals that will get picked apart over the series (similar to how 2x01 is almost a section-by-section reflection of the rest of the season). It is telling us what to look out for, and these are thing things I got from the first episode:
The Grandeur of Mythmaking your History (MAGA reference), Sexuality as a Coping Mechanism, Tranformational Trauma, Death and Escape, Music as Expression, and the Double-Edged Sword of Attention.
I'm sure there's other things as well, but this series is dense, and honestly I don't know how to summarize the Fang Gang? They're clearly an important part, but I might just connect that to Mythmaking of History since they seem to have attached themselves to the Children of Darkness to try to emulate them. "Armand told the truth" feela just as nonsensical as "Make America Great Again," because what are you talking about? When was America great, and what did Armand tell the truth about? It's chasing a history that simply doesn't exist the way they want it to.
3x02 is the act that is specifically addressing the loudest point that Lestat made in 3x01, which is Sexuality as a Coping Mechanism. I'll go more into a Gabistat analysis another day, but we can now see where Lestat learned that coping mechanism. So this episode is breaking that down, and giving us the tools to shapren the details hiding under the veneer. When Lestat is asking for sex, he is seeking external validation. Too much external validation, and it becomes sickening because it's just treating the exterior of the wounds without cleaning them. He wants emotional and mental validation, but because the coping mechanism of external validation is easiest (because of the incestuous abuse, and Gabriella using her sexuality as act of power), it makes a negative feedback loop of dranining his emotional and mental energy (Lestat wanting all those fans, and Baby Jenks asking why he makes it so HARD).
We can see this in the side characters as well. Daniel starts out naked in the shower, and "comes out," before immediatly flirting with Gabi. He asks Louis on a date, which ends up as a cover for the Talamasca to move in. The consistent set-up where nudity is always in the background acting as a numbing distraction. Louis himself is keeping his emotions in a neat little box and fucking his "emotionally unavailable" lawyer, since his emotions and vulnerability were all laid out in print because of Daniel. The Band are reflecting on how Sex Drugs and Rock and Roll have been hiding Lestat's true identity and has been covering up their own reality and insecurities.
But why not just show us how the past built to this? Why so much time in the present, showing us Gabriella actively pushing his boundaries? I'm sure we'll get more answers later, but at the moment I will say it's probably because the rest of the bs hasn't been broken down yet. It's a scar that Lestat knows is there, and is TELLING us how he got it (like the wolves), but he's really SHOWING us how that wound (and thus his hypersexuality) is a result of trauma-related self-harm. He is in denial that he is self-harming, but he can't move on from talking about it because denial is just fingers petting over the open wound and he doesn't actually know how to stitch it closed, even in Frame #2 (I'll get to that in a second).
It's difficult to say for sure though, because Lestat's framing device wavers between 3 and 4 frames removed from these events.
Think of a Narrative frame as taking a picture. If you zoom in to a detail and take a screenshot, that screenshot is another frame you have put around that detail. If you zoom in further on that detail, that eventually becomes another narrative frame. If you don't carefully maintain and sharpen the details as you zoom in, you will only get blurry pixels by the end.
That pixel-like blur seems to be purposefully used as a story-telling device, though, which is the strangest approach to an Epistolary Narrative I have seen.
Frame 1 - This is a recording that is being auctioned off in a diatant future we do not have the pieces to understand the context of yet. However, at the moment it feels like recordings are purposefully set up for this event, considering the dramatic gesture of burning the original copies as a nod to Louis at the end of s2.
Frame 2 - This recording is what Lestat made AFTER a gigantic world-shifting occurance we have no context for (Akasha), in a period of time he was isolated and alone. The state of mind he is in isn't clear, but it is clear he is still a pretentious dickwad interested in presenting the Mythos of Lestat de Lioncourt.
Frame 3 - He is recalling events that he hadn't had time to fully process yet (2025) and may be processing them as he is reflecting with whatever state of mind he is in frame 2. These are occasionally paired with frames of Daniel's documentary which was being made at the time, but they still are being colored (or uncolored I guess) by Lestat's first two frames. [This is all technically told over a record, which has no visual medium, so this is for audience purposes to feel like there are additional documents that ground Frame 3 in reality]
Frame 4 - The events being recalled are also about when he was recalling events he was avoiding about his past.
Events that are 4 frames away are ultimately the most unreliable, because they are being filtered through a LOT of frames of narrative, including a lot of internal reflection from frames 2 and 3. I would say the realest narrative we get from anything in the 4 frame comes from when events are framed in the emotional device of music, (like the song he sings in the restaurant), or when he isn't deflecting with humor, sexuality, ect ect.
This is VERY different from Seasons 1 + 2, where the furthest frame from the story is only 3 frames deep, and even that 3rd frame is incredible close to the 1st because of Daniel's purpose as a narrative device.
Frame 1 - Daniel and Louis are meeting in Dubai in the present. There does not seem to be a narrator, as Daniel and Louis both share control of the camera and the narrative, even as they occasionally fight for it.
Frame 2 - Louis is recontextualizing a past interview he did with more perspective and a seemingly more calm and controlled demeanor. This is the frame that sometimes blurs the third frame, but most of the time it is transparent and used by Daniel to sharpen the details in Frame 3. This is the one Armand also uses to blur intention and gaslight Louis.
Frame 3 - Louis's memories and Claudia's diaries depict the events in chronological order, building on each other and in conversation with each other. There are holes in this frame, and some elements are suspect through bias, emotional intensity, trauma, and mentall illness, but they are interacted with by Frame 1 in continuous conversation.
This makes me really miss Daniel as a narrative device. Daniel wouldn't stand for this autobiographical Puff Portrait of Drama. Probably why Lestat is so dismissive of the documentary and Daniel's prodding.
Lestat's narrative reminds me a lot of breaking down the Narrative frames in Frankenstein, haha. Like so much of that narrative is contained by this dude writing letters to his sister, which means it all is being written down by him recollecting conversations he had with Victor, who is recollecting his own past, who then recollects conversations with the Monster, who is recollecting events from when he was developing into a conscious being. The narrative is fundamentally controlled by Victor and his intentions with sharing it (which are more like Louis's intentions, honestly), so we have to also ask Lestat what HIS intentions of framing all of this are for. And to him, it's The Failures. Something he stuggles to admit to.
So I guess the point I'm trying to make here is that Lestat's intention seems to be reflecting on his failures, which pair strangely with the Act system the show is giving because Lestat is trying to give us the story of what THE SUBJECT was like at the time, while also hiding what Frame 1's purpose is. Lestat may have called Louis a library of confusion, but that seems to just be a projection because Louis's library actually has an archival system, which Lestat is just Vibes and arbitrary tags. (Oh my god, Lestat is like Tumblr's archival system. Or maybe a musical album, idk, I'm not much of an album person.)
Anyway, I understand all the people who are looking at this and saying it's paced poorly, or the writing is weaker. We've had two years to deconstruct and analyze the beautiful Gothic Horror of Louis's story with the keystone intact, and so this feels messy in comparison.
At the moment, I do feel like that is by design. If I remember correctly, it was Rolin or Hannah who mentioned that this season was essentially including Lestst fighting vulnerability as a narrator, and his emotional arc doesn't even finish until what they want for season 4. The fact they seem unsure they'll get renewed is a point of anxiety for me, as someone who cares about how much investment a story should expect from it's audience.
Because Louis wanted to understand his story as much as the audience did, it made that break in-between seasons work well, because we were just as motivated and impatient to meet up with him and learn more. Lestat, on the other hand, is fighting the audience AND himself, so if we don't actually get a keystone to understand the narrative by 3x07, we're investing in a wild-card. It's a gamble with no assurance we'll ever understand the story the way the writers want us to, especially becausee we're dealing with one hell of an unreliable narrator.
But, who knows. If they're organizing these acts like a music album, with each song building on the emotions the previous one left behind, I can only assume the next episode will use the sharpened details about hypersexual self-harming we just got to peer at Lestat's past relationships with Nicki, Armand, and Magnus, while the established threat of Gabriella's prodding will become more nuanced as we see her interact with other characters.
reading this, and what you said about lestat's frames 1-4, i think it's actually helping me realize something.
this season is NOT adapting tvl. what they're doing in 3x1 & 3x2 is NOT the voice book!lestat uses in tvl. this season is totbt in medias res. everything lestat's saying and doing is peak totbt wtfery. sure, amc's jumbled things around, pushing book events earlier into the tvl era (qotd, totbt, merrick, etc), but these failures are screaming totbt!lestat.
cuz like you said: he clearly hasn't processed ANYTHING, to be recording the failures POST muses POST ghost!claudia POST bruce being killed POST akasha etc, and STILL be just as angry & lashing out & steeped in denial. that's totbt lestat.
it's actually memnochian if i really think about it.
but because we know david talbot's dead (LOL), that begs the question of how those book changes will affect amc!lestat as well--the main reason memnoch approached lestat was BECAUSE of how badly lestat had treated david. and the reason lestat glommed onto david so hard was cuz of how bitter he was feeling towards louis. so the framing KEY is needed, yes, but also the framing CONTEXT.
WHY is lestat so angry & alone?--"friendless," as rolin jones called him. is it for the same book reasons? is something else wrong?
IWTVL S3 Ep2 Musings - Pimping Daniel & Sam: Loustat's Vampiric Nature of Exploitation
I think I get what's going on with Louis hiring Sam as his DJ.
Which is why Lestat's hypocrisy is making my blood boil, because he's got some nerve.
As an artist, music is Lestat's outlet/distraction/opiate, so he exploits Daniel to keep his rock star career successful--the one thing he has left.
As a capitalist, money is Louis' outlet/distraction/opiate, so he exploits Sam to keep his real estate career successful--the one thing he has left.
Oh, so Lestat can cart Daniel around like a dog on a chain making the documentary specifically designed to rewrite Louis/Daniel's book and make Louis look like an even bigger evil liar; knowing full well that his pet lackey Daniel's working for the exact same Talamsacan agency that sent Sam to sabotage/destroy the coven that killed Claudia and tortured--and lynched & almost killed Louis (burying him alive; "eternity in a box"). The SAME agency about to sic Louis on the Fang Gang like an attack DOG and put him in danger--but they're not talking to LESTAT asking him to risk HIS neck, are they?
But how DARE Louis lock The Vampire Sam in perpetual indentured servitude to him, DJing at all the clubs Louis owns around the world?!
Louis is NOT forgiving Sam, let alone befriending Sam. Last time I checked, Sam wasn't butt naked in Louis' hotel room, flirting with his mother & feeding from his social media manager with impunity!? Who did that I wonder, repeat the name~!? 🤨
So how TF is Lestat gonna sit Louis' face talking about being with Armand (based on a SEISMIC LIE BTW) as if Louis was willingly/knowingly with the perpetrator candoodling with his victim Louis--when DANIEL is busy canoodling with Lestat and his whole entourage?! Isn't Lestat a victim of Daniel's book being published?! Yes or no! Quickly!
Oh! So when LESTAT does monstrous things it's: Teeheehee how fun & camp & c*nt vampires are monsters~! But when LOUIS dishes back as good as he receives and does the exact same thing, IRL journalists call Jacob/Louis a "d*ck" to his face?! 🤔
This fandom cannot make up its mind whether/which vampires should be held to human standards of morality, ethics & decency. But it certainly made up its mind to always put the onus on Louis, and never on Lestat, when they're both busy doing the exact same thing--AS VAMPIRES.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
its a very tight, streamlined narrative of louis+claudias abuse at the hands of violent manipulative & predatory men, & the lengths those men go to maintain control, its got some of the most stark & unsettling & visceral depictions of domestic violence , memory loss due to trauma. its vampires for fucks sake, its about monsters & how they use existing systems of power (white supremacist patriarchy, most obviously) to keep preying on the people around them with a supernatural tilt, & it feels like every other post or art or video abt it is 'gay vampires doing crazayyy shit lol #istandwithmycancelledwife' like nothing anyone on that show does has any weight or impact or meaning whatsoever. like the damage inflicted by those characters doesnt mean anything, & like the very very realistic & human violence taking place in it is negated by the fact that theyre vampires so it cant *really* matter. using the fact that its about vampires & that its gothic romance to shield anyone talking about the impact or implications inherent with the genre. people who want the romance of gothic without any of the horror. without it meaning anything. mindboggling
sorry to hijack your excellent post like this OP, but it's been on my mind, and seeing s3 unfold, as of 3x2 lestat's narration very much proves your point: Oh, we're vampires doing crazzzzzzy ish see how much fun we can be having weee~! sexsexsex! but what's killing me is that just like the guigonettes guzzling the santiagoisms in 2x7, IRL audiences are FALLING FOR IT all over again, to validate the horrible things lestat did to louis & claudia in s1 & s2.
the entire gothic horror significance is flying right over their heads as they get distracted by lestat's antics. when once again, the whole point at the META level is that s3 lestat's deliberately LYING--to us and for dang sure to himself. he's the most unreliable narrator we've had, which is saying something considering s1 & s2. the entire point of monsters in gothic horror is that vampires are NOT monsters; they're PEOPLE with HUMAN SOULS who are doing monstrous things and tryna EXCUSE it. AMC!gabriellA proves it: she was disgusting BEFORE she was ever a vampire. ("*sigh* eff it. it's different for vampires. that's it!") even at the end of TVC its summed up that vamps are only damned if they CHOOSE to be--not because god wills it or wtvr, but because they refuse to DO BETTER for themselves, let alone other people.
☝️ LIES.
so yeah, really i just wanted to state that as of s3 things are looking no different, really.
also i wanna add that in the midst of this utterly shitty writing i kinda didn't even focus on the fact that the trial is treated as a joke now. have you cried at s2e7, my dear viewer? nah, don't worry about this now. i wanna apologize to people with whom i argued about the trial and the way claudia will be treated in this season, because everyone who was saying that "claudia will only be used for angst points now" were totally correct.
they really do pick random moments where they feel like they need to add angst and that's when claudia's name is evoked, but otherwise we're supposed to move on from everything that happened & somehow even joke about it when we feel like it. so it means that all this time the writers totally didn't care and used it for shock value and as part of the "they do horrible things to each other because they're monsters" narrative. we really put a lot of trust in these people huh.
the real reason why we weren't given much press after the ending of s2 is because amc was afraid that rolin would start saying left and right how "the coven had a point" and that he agreed with santiago but "not everyone has the same opinion, so it's okay"
@blueteainfusion And it's not just the writers, they're ALL in on it: Jam & esp. this Lizzie wench with her head-ahh questions & sloppy slapdash AF interviewing style, like wtf is this:
The handwaving aside of Louis' RIGHT to be angry at Lestat is wild. Lestat asked Louis in 3x1 wtf was up with the book, and Louis said he burned the laptop & didn't want the book to be published at all. Lestat KNOWS that Daniel & The Talamasca went behind Louis' back.
And yet rather than ask Louis directly what in the book was things HE said about Lestat, and what DANIEL/The Talamasca added in, instead Lestat just accuses LOUIS for insulting him "page after page;" when we literally saw Louis DEFENDING Lestat against DANIEL constantly telling him he was being abused by Lestat & Stockholmed, HELLO?! But LOUIS' being a "d*ck"?! When Lestat's not even LISTENING to Louis explain that what's in that stupid book are NOT his words?!
Which is why I said THANK GOD Jacob corrected Lizzie, to remind her that this whole story in S3 is being told strictly through LESTAT'S PETTY AF POV. This is NOT an objective POV like the Dubai scenes. And Lestat's voice-overs in The Failures SAY SO.
So if we can understand that S1 & S2 were unreliable cuz of Louis' memory/mindwipes/PTSD/etc--then why TF is everyone walking around assuming that Lestat's NOT being a unreliable narrator?! 🙄
@whattaworldwhattaworld literally WHEN are they gonna talk about The Trial? 😩🤦♂️ This is all so STUPID, because we literally saw Louis ask Lestat in 2x8 why TF he let Louis believe Armand save him--and we KNOW the Reunion Scene really happened, cuz Lestat threw Louis' words about companions right back in his face to shade Lemuel! Instead, Loustat are just talking in circles rehashing old crap that they shoulda BEEN settled by now; they're BOTH being petty--yet only LOUIS' being called a d*ck?! Who's the one going on a whole rock tour slandering Louis from state to state? The GLASS HOUSES of it all. 🙄
@yusiyomogi and yet idiots wanna say Louis' not taking accountability. As if EVERYTHING in S1 & S2 is fake, lol. "B-b-but The Train Scene never f*****g happened~!" IDGAF. Louis already got clarification that Armand screwed up his memories--I burned his laptop! Lestat already confronted Louis for keeping the book being published a secret for a month. Louis' gotta take accountability for hurting Lestata's feelings, but when is Lestat gonna take accountability for being a RACIST? 😒 Cuz Armand didn't lie/erase EVERYTHING. Meaning some of what Louis said about Lestat IS true--if Lestat never did anything effed up to Louis, Armand wouldn't've had such an easy time convincing Louis. 🤷♂️
Chile, this show is clearly biting off more than it can chew, to be losing so many plot threads this badly ALREADY.
IWTVL S3 Ep2 Musings: The Lioncourt Massacre: Repercussions?
I need to elaborate on why the lack of context in AMC's Auvergne scenes bother me so much:
The Women & Children
Where Does Roget Fit In?
1) The WOMEN & CHILDREN
Even pre-S3's premier, as soon as I started speculating about a potential Lioncourt Massacre, I voiced my thoughts/concerns about what it would mean if Lioncest killed not just the a-hole brothers & father, but also Lestat's sister-in law, and her kids.
And in 3x1 we get the flash-frame of Lestat pimp slapping TF outta the sister-in-law, confirming that it's a real memory he's having, not a hallucination (a la "Augustine" at the strip club).
And in 3x2 we see exactly what Lestat did to her:
He slashed her face with his claws when he slapped her, broke her leg(?), and ripped her throat out. This looks more like a WOLF attack--which I WOULD say is likely why Lioncest did it, if only it wasn't for what they did to Augsutine & the Marquis; ain't no wolves did THAT. 💀
So my questions are:
"Dang. What did [s]he do to make them THAT mad?" 🤔
What happened to the KIDS? 😨
Cuz there's a BIG problem here, about MOTIVE. We totally get why the brothers & father had to die--no qualms there! But what did the WIVES do to deserve all that? They literally NEVER talk, and NGL they look like hostages the whole time.
Gabrielle TELLS US they were "cabbage wives all speaking cabbage," but AMC never SHOWS them doing anything but feeding their kids. There's not even any body language to clue us in that these heffas are no good--no rude smirks or rolling of the eyes or laughter as Gabs coughs or anything.
And the kids are literally blink & you miss them.
Which brings me to my 2nd point.
2) Where Does Roget Fit In?
Yeah, we know in the BOOKS that the Lioncourts are dirt poor, but AMC doesn't actually indicate it at all--like I said (x x) : the house is still opulently-furnished & well-appointed even during the Revolution--not a single solitary wax candle missing from any of the lavish candelabras or chandeliers; all the sculptures, oil paintings & wallpapers intact even DURING the Lioncourt massacre). Which makes Gabrielle hollering about the kids being "nothings who will inherit nothing!" meaningless, because OF COURSE they'll inherit nothing--they're GIRLS. 😂 The only reason they wouldn't have a DOWRY, however, would be if their triflin fathers just didn't GIVE them one--it's not like they can't SELL all those marble busts & oil paintings to give them a nest egg?..... 🤦♂️
AMC made it so that Lestat only had NIECES, no nephews--meaning that if Lestat & his brothers didn't have SONS ASAP, then the Lioncourt family name/legacy/dynasty (estate & all) would be lost forever--since girls marry OUT, not IN (the same problem the DPDLs had when Paul was too unstable to have kids & Louis was GAY AF 🌈).
So yes, while we can breathe a sigh of relief that apparently Lioncest didn't kill the nieces when they got home...WHAT happen to them? 🤔
Unless AMC makes it SUPER CLEAR in the next episodes that LESTAT was the one hunting for food, we LOSE the significance of his role as the "Harecatcher" who was the sole provider of food at his otherwise starving family's table. 🤦♂️
AMC also needs to explain WHO Roget is to Lestat--the family of lawyers Lestat hired to keep tabs on his family & keep them financially provided for as he & Gabs traveled The Devil's Road looking for Marius.
And of the ramifications if AMC!GabriellA SABOTAGES Lestat's correspondences with Roget.... 😬💀
TL;DR: Context & Continuity, Please AMC 🙏
So yeah, these are just what I hope we'll see in the future episodes. Cuz this is supposed to be the season explaining/contextualizing WHO Lestat even is.
Yeah, I get it, his mom was raping him, I heard him the first gajillion times he referred to his Oedipiphanies. And yes, I know Magnus will rape him in 3x3. A lot of rape is happening. But WHAT ELSE?
Which is why I'm STILL looking at this whole "threatened Claudia with rape on the train" stuff like HUH? 🤨 When was that EVER mentioned in S1 or S2? 🤨 QUICKLY. He's compared to Bruce as an abusive patriarchal menace who broke her leg in the Ep5 Fight and kept her prisoner in the house--NOT as a RAPIST. But AMC's doing this whole Rape Motif and I'm like???? (And chile don't get me started on S3 Louis. 😭)
Incestuous grooming is NOT the end all be all defining Lestat as a person. And unless AMC clarifies that ASPAP, I'm gonna call this season SUCH an L for not laying the groundwork of how everything in France affected Lestat's behavior in NOLA 100+yrs later. 🤦♂️
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Especially since if the 3x2 Lawyer Scene is any indication, there are frames we've been seeing in the teaser/trailer promo that aren't making it to the actual episodes (eg: Louis touching Lemuel's hand, etc).
So now I can't tell if that's just because of MEMORY issues (scenes will be revisited with the missing frames added in, for context or wtvr), or because of PRODUCTION issues (stuff just got left on the cutting room floor).
Regardless, my paranoia is at an all-time high, so I need to keep tabs before I start getting SUPER confused.
Despite the utter debacle around the 3x2 Lestat's Backstory fiasco, I DO think we're still getting The Witches' Place. It's appeared far too many times for it to not happen, just cuz Rolin confirmed that we're not getting anything from the Monastery, commedia troupe, or all 8 wolves.
Especially since I'm wondering if AMC will make it that what caused bb!Lesat's stutter was 1 of 3 things:
Lioncest--his mother AMC!GabriellA! molesting him (WHEN did it start?)
Child Abuse--mom AND dad (plus brothers)
The Witches' Place--Les seeing innocent women burn at the stake
I wouldn't be surprised if it's #1, but I'd be way more interested in it being #3. Cuz there's several things AMC's already changed.
The Mother or the Good Nurse?
I'm assuming that AMC is changing the books again, to instead make AMC!GabriellA be the one who BROUGHT Lestat to see the witches burn, rather than book!Gabrielle being called to take him AWAY? 👀
Cuz book!Gabrielle wasn't there with Lestat when he saw the witches burn, it was his nursemaid/servant. Gabs was asked to drag him back home when he had a mental break--esp. since we know bb!Lestat could see visions (and perhaps ghosts.... 👀). We'd need to know if the monks went to the chateau BEFORE the Witches' Place (unlikely), or AFTERWARDS (esp. if the whole village saw Lestat have a meltdown).
So unless I just need more context for the scene, and the woman holding bb!Lestat's hand is his nurse, not his mom, then I think they're giving AMC!GabriellA the same position as Lestat vs Claudia when Charlie died; her forcing him to watch to make him "a man"; OR to reinforce in him that Men Ain't Ish cuz they burn innocent women (a la why Akasha's doing her Valar Morghulis Great Purges, AND ofc Armand/Santiago burning Claudia alive).
So yeah, I got my eye on you, Gabs, nasty heffa! 👀😤
Next up: Pyrophobia (Lestat & Claudia)
I'm also hoping that AMC will bring in book!Lestat's phobia of fire, BECAUSE of the Witches' Place; to emphasize the cycles of abuse perpetuating from Auvergne to NOLA:
Cuz unless AMC literally retcons EVERY. SINGLE. SCENE from 1x4 and says that ALL of Claudia's diaries are a FORGERY (Louis, Armand, etc), then there are SO MANY instances where Lestat DID abuse Claudia, traumatize her & give her PTSD. Cuz there's parallels with Claudia & Akasha too, when she says Charlie's the last man she'd ever love again--she gave up on the Y Chromosome after he died; and Bailey Bass said Claudia's own PTSD with fire came from LESTAT forcing her to watch Charlie burn. Which is why IDGAF about tragic backstories--they're not an EXCUSE for abusive behavior, they're an EXPLANATION, giving context for why & hurt people hurt people.
Lastly: The Stutters
AMC removed Lestat's illiteracy. In the books he NEVER had a stutter; he had a laughing tick (which we DO see on the show in 1x3, etc). Unless you've got dyslexia or something, illiteracy isn't a physical ailment or trauma response--it's the result of little to no education. In book!Lestat's case, that was due to book!Gabrielle's negligence as an absentee mother, and the Marquis' physical abuse (ordering the brothers to forcibly drag Lestat back home when they couldn't afford to keep him at the Monastery anymore; then beating & starving him when he wanted to go back to school).
So my question's if the stutter/laughing was a neurological tick he was BORN with, or just a PTSD trigger, despite the reviewers saying he only started stuttering at 9yo. 🤔
Like, I get why they say this, cuz Sam Reid said Les was 30yo when he killed the wolves, and in that scene Les has no stutter--so he clearly improved over time (he doesn't have it as a vampire talking to Gabs pre-Lioncourt Massacre, either). Even as a teen in the "Cabbages" scene we see him able to talk better, until his father threatens him and he reverts back to stuttering as a trauma response. It would also make sense why he still stutters in the present day (2x8 Reunion Scene, 3x1 Gabs Intro).
TL;DR: "Rigged To Burn, Daniel"
So yeah, I think the stuttering probably started either cuz of either child abuse, Lioncest, or the Witches Place; but I'm hoping it's the witches.
And I'm also wondering if the carousel comes round again if AMC sticks to the books or not, and instead of Merrick Mayfair being a witch who burns after exorcising Goblin (Blackwood Farm), instead she burns after exorcising ghost!Claudia (Merrick); as Lestat watches a witch burn in front of him again.
The question would be if AMC puts her in the same category as David Talbot (rest in piss), as an evil Talamascan or not. 🤔
