I’ve seen people saying Lestat doesn’t have the right to be upset with Louis now after everything that happened in s1. Which seems a bit reductive to me? What do you think?
One of the things that I was taught pretty early on in writing is that the best conflict - the most true to life conflict - is when both characters within an argument are right, and I think the show's done a really good job at depicting that. Louis does have every right to be upset, not just over what happened in New Orleans, but over what Lestat has kept from him over the years and how he's now handling that with the music, just as Lestat has every right to be upset about the way Louis' told their family's story so publicly, how he shared not only his own rape but their daughter's with the world, and how he didn't tell him about the book to give himself time to prepare for the impact of that. I think he also has the right to be upset over what Louis asked of him in the last ep with Regina.
It's kind of interesting to me though that people are arguing that Lestat doesn't have a right to be upset because of New Orleans, because while I think the show is always allowing the drop and those broader events space in the story and keeping its impact tangible on both characters, it's also a past that's been - on a story level - partially reconciled in a way that other things haven't? Lestat apologised for the drop and in letting Louis go in the finale showed meaningful growth, but Lestat's never apologised for never telling Louis about Armand or TdV which in a lot of ways is the bigger betrayal given everything it lead to, and it's a pattern that has continued. Lestat does have a right to privacy, but he makes active choices in what information he gives those around him access to in a way that does still cause ongoing harm, both to others and himself.
That is though understandable in this current arc too with the context of the book and the fact that Louis told Daniel about Magnus (among other things) - again! They're both right here! - but it still depicts a pattern of behaviour that's deeply rooted in their current relationship conflict. Their mutual unwillingness to be truly vulnerable with each other is currently the core conflict of their dynamic, and the pain and anger that comes with the realisation that the other hasn't been vulnerable or honest underpins a lot of the character and relationship tension.
New Orleans is always going to be an important chapter in their story, and a really important dynamic that they both have to wear, but I don't think using it as a yardstick for character feeling is particularly useful? Especially at this point in the story, I also think it shows an unwillingness to meet the story of these characters where they're currently at, and a bit of a detachment from what this story actually is.
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✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
really amused by all the complaints about Lestat in particular using modern day terminology in kind of a cringe way when that is one of the most book-accurate beats of the season
"why are there so many pop culture references this season" because Lestat loves pop culture! he is chronically online and a little goofy lmao that's just the character! they are writing for the character the season is about
really amused by all the complaints about Lestat in particular using modern day terminology in kind of a cringe way when that is one of the most book-accurate beats of the season
I feel for everyone who isn’t having the time of their fucking lives with The Vampire Lestat. Every week I clap and cheer for the antics of the world’s saddest buzzword-laden bisexual crash-out diva and his crew of the least healed men to ever grace the small screen. The songs are cringe delightfully camp, the wigs are a nightmare, I’m living my best life, I’m loving every second. Why the fuck would you have a blood shower in your tour bus. The onscreen mother-son incest is only like the third wildest thing happening in any given episode. It’s insane. I never want it to end
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✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
That Lestat is pulled from the ground unwillingly. That he is chosen from afar. A young vampire overwhelmed and ready to die plucked from the depths to be the Keeper without the option to decline, without much instruction as to how to safely proceed. That he performs for an audience of one, year after year without promise of it ever ending. The loneliness. And finally, after so much time a word is whispered, a glimmer, he is drawn near only to be bent, overpowered, and drained. In many ways it is a repetition of his turning. The time longer, the motivation different, but the actions are in many ways the same. He is watched, he is chosen, he is taken, he is drained, and in the end he is transformed into something new and frightening. Marius screaming that he is unworthy, a failure and casting him out an echo of so many voices before his.
Lestat is abandoned, again, with an unfathomable power and deeply suppressed rage.
And then he meets and falls in love with Saint Louis
very curious as to where you’re afraid lestat and armand might go? i’ve never been invested in that relationship but get why they have their fans.
Hi anon! I'm glad the tags cleared some things up for you:) but to answer your first question, first I just want to reiterate that my feelings on where I think this might be going are not necessarily a criticism of the show, at least not yet, but rather about my own expectations as a fan, and what I WANT to see. As I said in my tags, I'm a hypocrite because I am as protective and biased towards my favorite evil vampire as much as the next person and have formed certain expectations because of it that may not reflect an objective reality lol. Anyway, I'm putting this behind a read more for speculation, and for length.
Where I think the finale is going: there are scenes from the final trailer with Lestat and his fledglings (including TC) sitting around a long table, which seems to be the table Magnus referenced in episode three. One shot has Daniels head coming through the ceiling as he berates Lestat, and Lestat says himself in his voice over that Daniel will seek revenge on him for his telepathic prank. There is speculation going around, that I agree with, that Daniel and possibly Armand will find a way to subdue Lestat somehow (possibly by beheading him? There are hints) to stop him from continuing with his music (Armand) and/or to get in his head (Daniel) and as a result at least part of the episode will take place inside of Lestat's head as he is finally forced to confront his Failures.
In terms of Armand and Lestat this season, the show has been a bit cagey about a couple of things with them. Lestat keeps bringing up the trial, but it hasnt been revisited. Also, Lestat and Armand's involvement around Nicki's death seems a bit murky as of right now: Lestat is taking most of the responsibility, even saying Armand did him a favor by doing what he couldn't in putting Nicky out of his misery, but is quietly refusing to address Nicky's accusation that he cheated on him with Armand as well as Armand's reference to him "sharing his body" with him and the coven. So, given that Rolin has said Armand has a big role in the finale, I think the finale will do one of two things regarding this relationship: Option 1: it will follow book canon and it will be revealed that Armand had a much bigger hand in Nicky's demise, that anything physical that happened between him and Lestat in the past was either dubcon or outright noncon, and/or Armand had a much bigger hand in forcing Lestat to participate in the trial than he has admitted to thus far. OR, Option 2: the show will do the opposite and reveal that Lestat's guilt over advancing Nicky's psychosis by cheating on him and gaslighting him, as well as his guilt over freely participating in the trial, is causing him to unfairly blame Armand for his own actions, and this will be one of the Failures he has to admit to himself, which would be an inversion of the book.
Now I can't speak to whether or not this is good or bad writing or better for the show because honestly I can't be objective about it because Lestat is my favorite character and option 1 is what I WANT and expected to see. Like I freely admit that lmao you will not get any arguments from me that I am speaking as a fan, not as an objective critic. With that I mind I, personally, think option 2 kind of flattens both characters: if everything happened as told so far, then Lestat's beef with Armand in the past storyline is flimsy: yes, Armand kidnapped his boyfriend and led him and his mother to a cult orgy, but Lestat immediately dismantled said cult, and arguably had a bigger hand in Nicky's death than Armand did by turning him and then lying to him. Which means, Lestat hated Armand because he found him and the cult kind of boring and lame and would rather hang out with his mom? If that's the case, why didn't Lestat tell Louis and Claudia about other vampires/the coven back in Nola? Why did he tell them other vampires are vicious? He would have basically been holding a grudge against Armand for no reason, which is a total inversion of one of his major characteristics in the book, where he is empathetic to such a degree he can't hold a grudge to save his life. And it weakens Armanstat, because the beauty of that ship is that Lestat *does* love him, is attracted to him, understands him and eventually wants him around, but will never ever see him as a romantic option because Armand snapped when they first met and violated not just him but everyone he cares about. Whereas if none of that happened, Lestat just doesn't fuck with Armand because he's boring? Because he reminds him of how he failed Nicky? Idk it's weak, to me at least. And worse, it makes his treatment of Louis and Claudia worse, when the whole point of TVL is to provide the context of his behavior, and to alleviate the misunderstandings he and Louis had of each other. So far they are only doing this through Gabriella, which takes a lot of heat off Armand and makes the changes to her character feel a bit compensatory for making HIM less awful as well as just contextualizing Lestat's trauma and idk if I like that.
Which brings me to Armand. As I already mentioned, I've *been* annoyed about the drop, not just because it never happened in the book, but because they changed it from something that Armand does *to* Lestat, something that further shattered any chance of a romantic relationship between them, and instead made it something Lestat does to Louis, who is supposed to be the love of his life. And it would bother me less if they let Armand be equally awful on the show, but instead the pattern has been to either remove Armand's worst actions or recontextualize them so they aren't as bad. If option 1 happens, that would alleviate this, but if not? If it's option 2? Then that means Armand has been made totally passive in a way that feels unbalanced to me: unlike in the books, he never cuts off Nicky's hands, he never throws his coven into the fire (they offed themselves, according to him) he never mindfucked Claudia into trying to kill herself, he never mindfucked Louis into turning Madeline against his will, he never had a child sex slave (Dennis), he never pushed Lestat off the tower, he never assaulted Lestat, and his participation in the trial that killed Louis and Claudia is passive - it's an inaction, a decision not to stop something already in motion because he's scared of being alone instead of a decision he actively makes to keep Louis, as it was in the book. He never performed Frankenstein experiments on Claudia and Madeleine - instead Santiago violated their ashes. Even DM is kind of defanged in the show - Armand tortured Daniel when he is a stranger, but afterwards lovingly looks after him without his knowledge, whereas in the book chapter he actively makes Daniel addicted to his blood, makes him dependent on him, it's a very dark cat and mouse game that to me is way more interesting. If Daniel's turning was violent or noncon, it has happened off screen, as of now. Compare this to how Lestat has been handled - the most visceral, visually horrible act of violence thus far on the show happened directly from Lestat's hands onto the other main character, this after the show established a much bigger power difference between them then there ever was in the books. In the books, Lestat is seen weeping holding Claudia's dress during the trial, giving an enormous hint that he was distraught and didn't want to be there, whereas on the show they made his involvement ambiguous. Armand's tragic backstory was given to the audience within two episodes of introducing his character, giving us context for his actions before he even did anything bad. Lestat's back story was pushed to season 3, and his feelings towards Louis and Claudia are only just now beginning to be addressed with two episodes left. From my perspective, as a fan of both characters in the book, I can't help but feel that, right now on this moment, one is being portrayed more empathetically than the other by the writers. Like, everyone is excited that Armand is finally going "full gremlin" this episode by killing Larry, but it feels weak to me because it feels like revenge for Lestat doing a mild diss track, and/or part of a plan to get Lestat to stop encouraging the great conversion, which is honestly the right thing to do. And as much as I like Larry, he's ultimately like, an NPC yk? Like yeah it's evil but why isn't Armand allowed to be a villain directly towards the actual main characters for a while, the way he was in the books? Why are Lestat and Gabriella more fucked up instead? Why is the fact that he mindfucked Louis for 77 years unaddressed? It just doesn't make sense to me. But of course this is coming from a Lestat stan, I imagine Armand fans have very different feelings about all of this, and that's fine. I'm not trying to argue, I have already admitted that I am biased and not speaking objectively. But as you said, the rift in the fandom is a direct result of 1x05, and nothing Armand has done has been fully allowed to equal that. If Armand does harm Lestat in these next two episodes, people would be cheering lol like it just feels unbalanced!
Obviously this is where I'm sitting at this moment in time and I could be totally off base, or the writers could very well get me on board with whatever they got cooked up in these last two episodes. I'm definitely willing to wait and see! But one area I won't be a hypocrite is if things happen in a way I don't Iike will simply stop watching lol like I said in my original posts, it's a me problem, not necessarily a problem with the show, and I would just have to decide if I can continue to enjoy it or not. It wouldn't be the first time I dropped a show because I didn't enjoy it anymore, and it won't be the last. And it wouldn't even be my pettiest reason for doing so. So I'm just gonna wait and see!
one big thing i think people outside fandom (like, all fandoms, fandom in general, not any particular one) tend to misunderstand is they know it's a subculture of people who are weirdly deeply invested in fictional media, and they hear about drama caused by people in those subcultures being unhinged in not-fun ways, and they think the unhingedness comes from the fact of being overinvested in works of fiction.
which is a natural assumption, but in my experience that's not really the case? like in my experience the drama llamas in fandom are usually not the ones who are just genuinely very deeply into the fiction. i've known people who are basically thinking about star trek or x-men comics or supernatural pretty much 100% of their free time and ime that type of person is usually very nice and surprisingly functional in their regular life. when someone's a constant nexus of fandom drama it's usually not that they are obsessed with the actual work of fiction the fandom is about, it's at least one of the following:
what they're obsessed with is not the source material but their unhealthy parasocial relationships with one or more of the people who created it
what they're obsessed with is not the source material but some elaborate shared-universe subset of fanfic about it that's only barely related to the original at this point, and/or an esoteric reading-against-the-text reinterpretation of the source material (often if the canon is active and ongoing this leads to becoming actively hostile toward it for its inevitably increasing failure to conform to their preferred fanon)
what they're obsessed with is not the source material but the fandom itself and gathering clout within it, so that the source material basically only exists to them as a tool for scoring points in increasingly arcane fandom disputes
and very often you get the same person doing 2 and sometimes even all 3 of these, and that's where the trouble really starts
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✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
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✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
lestat: what if there was a great female vampire who was immensely powerful but needed me? what if she was made of stone so she could never leave or say something cruel or sit up or go anywhere without her keeper (me) her caretaker (also me) her child (me!!)? what if I showed her things that were interesting and exciting to me and she responded in ways I could construe as approving? what if the only thing I knew about her is that she is the progenitor of us all and I had no choice but to devote my life to caring for her and keeping track of her nightmarish fragility that could doom us all even though she has never asked for it because (again) she can't speak or protest?
also lestat: my relationship with my mother is fine.
