29♋️ Obsessively devoted to Devil’s Minion, Eric Bogosian & Assad Zaman..🖤 Sometimes drifting into Old Hollywood ghosts ✨🎥 (hi,Bogart) 🎞️ & always through an autistic lens🪐
I've seen people argue that Assad and Eric couldn't convincingly portray a romantic relationship because Assad referred to Eric as his grandfather. What do you think about that?
Thank you for your question. I’m actually going to use it as an opportunity to talk about something that‘s been on my mind for quite a while now.
Over the past few weeks, I’ve watched more and more people suddenly start discrediting Eric‘s acting, his chemistry with Assad, and even his ability to play a convincing romantic lead. And the common denominator always seems to be the same: his age. Honestly, I‘m tired of seeing it. You don‘t have to find Eric attractive. Attraction is subjective, and everyone has different preferences. However, there‘s a huge difference between saying, „He’s not my type“, and claiming that he isn‘t attractive, can‘t carry a romance, or should be replaced simply because he's older.
Personally, I find Eric incredibly attractive. I love his curls, his eyes, his arms, his smile, his humor, his charisma... To me, he‘s absolutely captivating. I’m not expecting everyone to feel the same way, but just as nobody gets to tell someone they have to find him attractive, nobody gets to tell me,or anyone else, that we can‘t
I’ve also seen people take Assad’s words far too literally and, in doing so, completely miss what he was actually saying.
Before you immediately focus on Erics age or start making tasteless jokes, take a moment to think about what a grandfather actually represents. For many people, a grandfather represents wisdom, guidance, patience, warmth, comfort, trust and emotional safety. Someone who makes you feel protected, supported and accepted. It’s not about how many candles are on their birthday cake.
Assad could have chosen so many different words. He could have simply said friend, mentor, or colleague. Instead, he chose a word that represents trust and comfort.
That’s why I genuinely don’t understand how some people have come to the conclusion that this somehow means they can’t portray a believable romance anymore. If anything, I’d argue the exact opposite. We’ve seen more than enough moments over the years to know that they clearly trust each other, feel comfortable around each other, and have no hesitation when it comes to sharing each other's space. And that‘s a huge advantage, not a disadvantage. Emotional vulnerability and physical intimacy are some of the most demanding parts of acting. They require trust, comfort, and a genuine sense of safety with your scene partner. If you already have that foundation, you’re not working against it, you’re building on it. To me, that makes the prospect of them telling a believable love story even more exciting, not less.
And Assad has been excited about telling this story with Eric from the very beginning. One of the first things he said to him was, „We’re going to hook up“. And when Eric later asked him, „Are you excited about our budding romance in future seasons?“, Assad‘s answer came without hesitation: „Mister I’ve been excited since day one. Since the day I met you, as well“.
None of that enthusiasm has changed over time. If anything, the opposite has happened. As they’ve gotten to know each other better, we’ve also seen their bond grow naturally over the years. They seem more comfortable around each other, more at ease, and more trusting than ever before. And let‘s not forget what Eric once shared in an interview about Assad regularly saying things along the lines of, „Just wait until I get my hands on you“. And then there's Assad‘s... let‘s just call it rather interesting comment under one of Eric‘s photos.🌝
Nothing about what Assad said suddenly erases everything else we’ve seen and heard over the years.
Another thing that’s been bothering me for quite some time is how differently this fandom treats the relationships between the different actors. When Sam and Jacob talk about how close they are, people celebrate it. They call it wholesome, genuine, and heartwarming. But somehow, when Eric and Assad talk about their bond, it suddenly becomes „fan service“ or proof that they couldn’t possibly play a believable romance anymore. And don’t get me wrong, of course there are moments that are playful and meant to entertain the fans. That‘s part of promoting a show, and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. What I don’t understand is why that automatically means every kind word, every heartfelt interview answer, or every genuine interaction suddenly has to be dismissed as fake.
And once again, it all seems to come back to one thing: Eric’s age.
I struggle to come up with any other explanation. If Eric were decades younger, or if a younger actor with the exact same dynamic were sitting next to Assad, I genuinely don’t believe I’d have to write this post in the first place. That’s exactly why this feels like ageism to me. Somehow, the moment an older person is involved, people become much quicker to question whether a friendship is genuine, whether admiration is sincere, whether affection is real, or whether love could possibly exist at all. I honestly don‘t understand that. Growing older doesn‘t make someone less worthy of being loved, admired, desired, appreciated, or deeply cared about. It doesn‘t suddenly make meaningful friendships, genuine affection, or even love impossible. Some of the most beautiful friendships exist across generations. The same goes for love between consenting adults. Age doesn’t erase our ability to connect with other people, nor does it diminish the value of those connections. To me, that’s exactly what makes relationships and friendships across different generations so special in the first place.
At the end of the day, I think it‘s genuinely beautiful when people find someone who makes them feel safe, understood, and accepted, especially in an industry that can often be so demanding and, at times, incredibly superficial. Those kinds of connections are rare, and to me, they're something to appreciate, not tear apart. So instead of looking for reasons why this bond somehow invalidates everything else, I‘d much rather appreciate it for what it is: two people who clearly trust and respect one another, and who seem genuinely happy to tell this story together!
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
As we get closer to the panel, I need people to remember that Assad, Jacob, and Eric didn’t write the shit you’re upset about, they didn’t write the shit I’m upset about. You do NOT need to take out your anger on these actors who literally just did their job, we already know they were disappointed with the writing just as much as a lot of people are.
And they have to defend the show because they could get fucking fired if they don’t, actors can’t just talk shit about a project that they are still contracted to, so don’t get upset when they don’t directly start going off about how much they hate the show and the characters and the writing.
I’m actually begging you guys to stop going to Jacob’s page on instagram and taking out your frustrations in his comments, it is childish and annoying. These are real people that are living their real lives outside of this show, stop treating them like characters that you can just harass because you’re mad that a TV show was not what you expected or wanted.
You know what, I think some of us moved on too quickly from the idea that TVL was Lestat's POV and all the characters were being filtered through him. People were very quick to remind us all of this when they wanted to deny that Armand and Daniel had a unique bond or that DM was even real at all, but somehow this argument got forgotten along the way.
And there's something I've been reflecting on with regard to this when it comes to Daniel and the argument that he's been flattened.
Now I thought of this when I saw this interview with Jacob:
Now if Lestat's POV is influencing the portrayal of Louis, why wouldn't that be true of other characters, particularly ones that he doesn't really like very much? Why wouldn't he portray Daniel—a two-time Pulitzer prize winner who was always on his ass, pissed him off, and then cut off his head—in a terrible and unsympathetic light? Why wouldn't he portray Daniel—the annoying fledgling of the guy who killed his daughter—as a stroppy teenager who uses Gen Z slang and straight up says that Lestat might be smarter than him (Daniel Molloy would NEVER).
I'm not saying that certain events never happened, because see this post, however what I am saying is that the Lestat filter, if it can colour Louis, then it's going to colour the others.
Lestat uses cringey slang in episode 1, a lot. So is Daniel really the one saying things like "yaoi manther" or did Lestat put those words in his mouth? Is Armand really saying "armends" and "girlies" or is that a Lestatification of all that? Armand mispronounces Amhurst when he emphasises the "H", just like Lestat with Worcester (notably, Daniel corrects Lestat but not Armand). He also says he's going to "lob" Regina's head off when the phrase is actually to "lop" something off. You could even argue that Armand speaking in his French accent and Daniel not questioning it is a part of this (although there could easily be other reasons for this too).
Now none of this explains why they made Daniel say so many offensive things—maybe he's just that much of an evil boomer. And none of this is to say that all the writing is perfect. But I do think that some of the things (particularly language things) that are being written off as OOC are actually like that on purpose.
The writers and cast have been talking almost constantly about Daniel's impending death. TVL has made numerous in-universe references to Daniel dying post-turning. His vampiric life is "brief", he "dies bad", etc. If I remember correctly, Rollins has said that Eric will have one of the best death scenes of his career. Eric and Assad have changed tune and have begun calling Daniel and Armand's romance doomed, which is the opposite of the narrative purpose it serves. On the surface, fairly concerning for anybody who likes Daniel and wants him to stick around, or is expecting Daniel and Armand to have the same ending that they do in the book series: together, and seemingly intending to stay that way.
LONG post. I'm back on my wordy bullshit. Keeping it under the cut so it doesn't kill anybody's screen.
This is a fairly MASSIVE spoiler to be throwing around for seemingly no reason. Giving the viewers advance notice that a fairly significant character is going to die in a future season and hyping up the scene in which it happens completely cheapens the value that such a major character death has narratively. It's not going to surprise us or keep us on the edge of our seats for what happens next, how other characters will respond, what this death would mean for the greater story. Any questions that would arise from the event would have already been asked and theorized about.
This has always struck me as very strange for several reasons. Obviously, spoiling such a massive plot beat is really fucking stupid. If it does happen, the fact that they've beaten us over the head with it for the last two consecutive seasons is going to ruin any emotional impact the scene has. The people who do not want Daniel to die will be far more annoyed and angry with the show than saddened or moved, because they won't be particularly surprised by it or interested in what follows. The people who have gotten tired of his character will feel vindicated, but they also won't be very interested in what follows because they do not care for the story implications of the death as much as they do getting rid of a character they dislike.
It confuses me and does not particularly interest me. I do not think that Armand deserves to lose what is ultimately his only truly loving relationship. I do not think that his story would benefit from not having Daniel in it, and I do not think that his character would get very much out of having to grieve him twice. If we assume that their chapter in QOTD is similarly canon to the show, with alterations made as needed to fit this story, then Armand and Daniel's relationship to each other is what fleshes out and closes both of their character arcs. Daniel choosing to be with him, even after everything that happens between them, is what completes one of Armand's most substantial challenges: accepting love without the need to control it absolutely.
Once Armand turns Daniel, he can no longer access and manipulate his mind. In the show, it's been well established that one of the only reasons Armand and Louis's relationship survived is because of how much Armand was altering Louis's memories and thoughts. Consistently throughout his development so far, Armand has tried and failed to keep his romantic interests by exercising complete control over their relationship. It connects deeply with his established fear of abandonment (or really, his fear of being alone), his need for control, and the fact that his two previous partners did not actually love him in the way that he wanted them to. He knew this, but stayed with them anyway, resulting in a constant and calculated manipulation of the dynamics he had with them to convince them that they should stay with him.
With Daniel, he cannot do this. Armand is hesitant to turn Daniel for many, many reasons, but one of them is that he is convinced that the relationship between maker and fledgling cannot withstand eternity. He believes (or rather, was taught) that the resentment will grow to overpower whatever love exists between them. Armand choosing to turn Daniel and then choosing to stay with him is in and of itself a substantial moment of development for him. Being locked out of Daniel's mind is a substantial moment of development. All of these changes have substantial consequences for how Armand develops as a character.
He is preparing himself for their relationship to end, believing that it is inevitable; Daniel proves him wrong. Armand does not believe that he can be loved without exercising complete control over his relationships; Daniel, again, proves him wrong. He struggles constantly with being able to believe and trust the fact that Daniel loves him for the simple fact that, once he had been turned, Armand could no longer control him. He does not have that safety net that he has clung to in his past relationships. What their relationship ultimately serves to explore is that Armand is not an emotionless, calculating abuser as he often first appears. He is, in fact, deeply complicated and traumatized, and his abusive actions stem from that trauma and are behaviors he can unlearn while he learns how to love a turned Daniel. This is the purpose Daniel serves in Armand's story. It allows the audience to explore a truly loving relationship between two characters who are not good people: who are bad, bad to each other sometimes, characters who are cruel and vindictive to others more than they are to each other, but who still love each other all the same.
In a character drama, the overall narrative and the actions that drive the story forward are guided nearly entirely by the characters' relationships to each other. Broader story events and external influences only happen in order to explore how those characters react to them and how they impact the relationships that the narrative focuses on. Each story we have followed thus far in the series has been about those relationships. Louis and Lestat, the two of them and Claudia, Louis and Claudia, Claudia falling in love with Madeleine, Armand and Louis, so on and so forth. The characters make decisions that center around and are influenced by their relationships; in turn, the story moves forward by exploring the consequences those actions have on those relationships. When we consider the possibility of Daniel dying, what we must also consider is why that decision would be made, and what exactly the writers are hoping to do with other characters following the event.
No story would be impacted more by Daniel being killed off than Armand's. The question that would need to be answered, however, is what exactly does this do for Armand's character? What lessons does he learn from losing Daniel? What purpose does it serve for his overall narrative? Once a character is dead, their death is not about them; their death is about what it does to other characters. The only reason a character ever dies in a character drama is to create a story for other characters.
For example, we can look at other significant deaths in the series to examine how this question is posed and answered. Claudia dies. Who does this affect? Louis and Lestat. So what happens to them? Louis's character arc becomes about grief and loss, and learning how to move on. Lestat's character arc becomes about guilt and regret, and learning how to forgive himself. Their relationship to each other develops as a result of this event as well. They grieve together, move on together, and become stronger as a pairing together.
How would we answer these same questions for Armand? Under the assumption that the QOTD chapter is still canon and considering that we have been given no reason to believe otherwise, Armand has already lost Daniel and grieved his absence. He may have watched him after erasing his memories, but they were not together, and Daniel did not remember what they had shared. This loss was very significant for Armand. If his dialogue in the finale is accurate (re: Lestat's the one talking), then it potentially colored the way he viewed his relationship with Louis irreparably; as a mistake, a waste of his time when he could have been with Daniel instead, if not for his own cowardice. He has experienced this pain; he has already integrated it into his narrative. So, how, exactly, would killing Daniel off permanently do anything meaningful for Armand's character other than torture him a little bit more?
Daniel's death would be unsatisfying in part because it would just be another fucking thing to traumatize Armand. One more tragedy in his long list of things that have pained him throughout his life. Narratively, there is nothing he would gain from losing Daniel that would result in important character development. Other character deaths serve to transform other characters and relationships. A truly well-executed character death will move the audience and motivate compelling narrative changes elsewhere in the story (re: Louis, Lestat, and Claudia). It would also be unsatisfying because, alongside not doing anything narratively significant, it would remove the narrative significance that his relationship to Armand actually does have for both of them, writing off one of the most compelling parts of their stories.
As mentioned before, this is a character drama. The writers of this show, no matter how much we may doubt them, would not make a decision like this without considering whether or not it would be compelling for another character. Since Daniel does not die in the book series, unlike Claudia, choosing to kill him off would have to serve a very specific purpose. I've seen people float the theory that they're giving him David Talbot's storylines and all of the body thief stuff, which is why he would die in the first place. There are numerous reasons this could be, but the most obvious one is that Daniel straight up doesn't have anything to do after a certain point in the series. Armand remains consistently relevant, but Daniel disappears for a while, so they need something to do with him. It is difficult to make up a satisfying character arc for an adaptation for the sake of making a previously irrelevant character an important part of the story, so this would make some sense. However, I do not really think it's needed. There are a lot of things Daniel could be doing now that he has more narrative relevance. Most of it could easily center around just being in Armand's life.
A related question to consider is how they intend to approach Daniel's madness. From what I understand, in the book series, Daniel loses his fucking mind shortly after he is turned, and Armand sends him away to hang out for forty years or so in Marius's basement. This effectively is their "break up" before they get back together at the end of the series. Yet, interestingly enough, this forty-year separation is chronologically consistent with the period they would have been separated in the show before Daniel is turned. Aging Daniel has reflected this timeline in reverse. Armand and Daniel meet in 1973 -> 12-year relationship -> Armand erases Daniel's memories of him -> They do not meet again until forty years later. This is either intentional because they intend to accelerate their story (which they already have), or a complete fucking accident. I am not above the idea that it could be a lucky coincidence, and they didn't actually intend for it to work out that way.
However, if it was an intentional decision, then this puts the story somewhere else entirely. Daniel and Armand get back together after spending forty years apart, much earlier than they do in the original series. Their reunion does not happen in the books until the very end of the series; now, if we assume that the forty-year separation has already happened and there is no Marius Basement Time in Daniel's future, then the writers now have to figure out exactly what they want to do with their relationship moving forward. Now, while all of these major story events are happening, Daniel and Armand are not separated. They are together. What does this change for them? How will it change the things they are doing during the story? Daniel has anger to overcome; he will, and he is capable of working through those emotions with time. Armand has a lot of trauma to heal from, and he will; he is capable of learning to love someone without having control of their mind.
What comes after is the question. What, exactly, do the writers intend to do with them? I do not think that Assad was wrong for calling their relationship deceitful and fucked-up. It is deceitful and fucked-up, which is the point of the way it grows and changes. It is deceitful; Armand is fucked-up, Daniel is fucked-up, but their development happens because of their mutual desire to be with each other and make it work. He's ended things with Louis, tied things up so he can ride off into the sunset with Lestat. Now, he has to go and make his amends for everything that happened between him and Daniel. I think this is the next stop on the narrative journey he is taking, and I think this is what leads into the kind of character arcs I was talking about in my prior post. Acceptance, understanding, honesty, and so on.
I do not think their relationship is going to remain deceitful and fucked-up. That would be antithetical to what they are setting up with the dialogue in TVL (re: that prior post again). Eric and Assad are not completely incorrect with what they have been saying because I think what they are referring to is only the beginning of where their dynamic is going to go. Daniel, still angry, and Armand, still deceitful, but this is where they need to begin to reach their ending. Point A to point B. The question is whether or not the writers will be able to successfully execute the journey between. Armand is searching for something he can cradle, someone who can cradle him in return, and he will find it in Daniel. He and Daniel will begin with that familiar violence and romantic horror, but they will not stay that way if this is executed properly.
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
"armand isn't owed an apology after all the shit he did to louis, i can't believe they made him do that"
hey guys? Do we maybe think that Armand's tit-for-tat mentality, and the way he's been tallying up his and everyone else's sins against each other is a problem? Is it maybe possible that Louis managing to find empathy for Armand in the face of the monstrosity being done to him, and that radical act of kindness and honesty (about the ways he unintentionally hurt Armand) moving Armand so much that it nearly breaks him, is idk a major theme of this whole season?
you know, sorta like how Lestat was holding onto his feelings of betrayal about the book, and all it did to serve him was make him absolutely miserable and lonely and push him into the arms of someone actively harming him. And how it was only after he let that go, and helped Louis even though he still thought that Louis didn't give a shit about him, that they were able to connect again and be happier than we've ever seen them.
Or like how Louis was able to look past his initial feelings of revulsion and betrayal about the Sophia lie, and offered comfort and a space to speak honestly, and how that granted him a deeper understanding of Lestat, and ultimately strengthened their bond.
Are we seeing the pattern here? How they're breaking the curse of loneliness when they stop seeing each other as monsters, and extend a bit of empathy, even when it's hard or not deserved? How addressing the gaping wound behind the actions might open the door to healing for both parties?
Speaking of having hope: do you still have hope that the show is going to do fully-fledged past devil's minion like fans have been theorizing for years? Or do you think the stalking reveal is unfortunately it? I want to still believe it but I almost feel ridiculous doing so at this point.
Absolutely.
I wrote a very long post about why "Past DM happened" was very much alive and well after ep5, and nothing really happened on TVL after that to change any of that.
The main things I mentioned in that post that point to a fully-fledged past DM for me were:
Rolin has said in an interview and to people at the live concert that LBF will be back in S4. I really don't think they'll bring him back just to do things in the background while Armand lurks and pines in the bushes. This will be young Daniel interacting with Armand.
The earliest example Armand gives Daniel of him 'interceding on Daniel’s behalf' in S3E5 is from 1990. That leaves 17 years in which book-style 1970s and 80s DM might have happened.
Something I don't think I mentioned in that earlier post, because the ask I was answering wasn't about past DM specifically, is the memory wipe we already know for an absolute fact Armand performed.
The theory that past DM happened but Daniel doesn’t remember isn't just something we as a fandom plucked out of thin air. There's the DM chapter in QotD, of course, but there's also textual evidence in the first two seasons.
They've been seeding DM - past DM - since the IWTV pilot episode. This includes one little tidbit I never picked up on but really liked when I saw someone point it out this morning.
But the big ones are:
Daniel remembering in S1E6 that he had seen Armand (then still Fake Rashid) the night he first met Louis in 1973.
After Armand reveals his vampire nature to Daniel and the audience in the S1 finale, Louis says, "You don’t remember, do you?" and Daniel confirms that he doesn't.
There are memories that Daniel is supposed to have of Armand that are missing! In the book, Daniel and Armand don't meet until after Daniel interviews Louis, but they met before that in the show. This was a huge revelation and it took less than 10 seconds for 99% of all DM shippers to agree that DM must have already happened.
Then in S2E5 it's literally confirmed that Armand erased a very traumatic experience from BOTH Daniel and Louis's memory!
While I don't like theories that Armand was constantly memory fucking Louis throughout their relationship, it does raise the question (to us, to Louis and to Daniel) of what else Armand might have erased from people's memories. You know, like the fact that he and Daniel had a full affair back in the 70s and 80s?
ALSO! They're still very much developing that Night Island spin-off they promised us way back in 2023 (I'm hoping they'll announce it at SDCC). There literally can't be a Night Island show without past DM, because Armand built it for Daniel.
So, yes, I'm absolutely 100% still a past DM truther. 🙂↕️
I’m having so much fun with all the articles and Eric posting today because this season had part of the fanbase hating on him and wanting him gone and making up theories about him leaving the show meanwhile Eric is beloved by his cast mates and keeps talking about all the things he wants to do as Daniel in the future, even saying him and Armand should lead the season. I love him so much and he’s the best Daniel they we could have asked for. He’s in it for real and he’s such a fantastic pair with Assad.
Devil's Minion fans gearing up for another two years of being told that they're delulu and that Armand is lying about loving Daniel and manipulated him into companionship and that past DM didn't happen
Despite what you've read in the interviews, are you still optimistic about DM? I don't want to be the only one clinging to this small bit of optimism I've worked so hard to maintain😅🥲
I kinda have to be, for my own sanity. 🫣
I was disappointed by the finale basically not addressing their relationship at all beyond "they're companions", but that hasn't really changed my hopes for their future, and neither have the interviews that have come out since the finale.
I think it's good to keep in mind that no one knows exactly what DM might look like in S4, including Assad and Eric. Because it hasn't actually been written yet. Rolin et al probably know the main beats they want to include, but the scripts don't actually exist yet.
From what Eric has said in other interviews, it kind of feels like Rolin and the writers don't tell him much about where Daniel is going in advance. And while I do think he's playing that up a little for those interviews, it's not hard to imagine the writers purposely not telling him too much, since he's been so incredibly prone to blurt out spoilers in the past.
The actors also can't tell us everything they do know, and they have to approach these characters differently than how we would approach them as an audience, because they're the ones playing them.
Assad said in another interview I read today (the one Vulture published yesterday, I think) that he often feels like an Armand apologist but that that's part of playing the character: he has to view things from Armand’s perspective to understand what motivates the character. Armand thinks making someone a vampire is the worst thing you can do, and (in the books) thinks it's inevitable that fledglings grow to hate/resent their maker. Maybe Assad is channelling Armand a little when he calls DM 'doomed'? I don’t know.
I've noticed something similar in interviews with Jennifer Ehle about earlier episodes in the season. She's so focused on inhabiting Gabriella that she somehow missed that Lestat was trying to set boundaries with her in ep2. Jennifer literally said that it IS different for vampires. It was abuse when they were still human, but vampires "don't have any morality". That's Gabriella talking. I just rewatched ep2 today and it VERY MUCH is about Lestat trying to set boundaries, struggling with what is happening between them, and trying (and failing) to excuse it in his narration. Lestat very slowly coming to see their relationship for what it is is a big part of the season. And if vampires didn't have any morality, there literally wouldn't be a show, because "am I of the devil?" and "what is my purpose in life/place in the world?" are very big overarching themes in both IWTV and TVL.
And this isn't a dig towards Jennifer. I think she did a great job playing Gabriella, but it does show that what the actors say about the characters isn't necessarily what we actually end up seeing in the finished product.
Similarly, I don't buy that Daniel’s only emotion at this point is anger. Anger towards Armand, anger towards Lestat. Just angry angry angry. Which is what Eric's been saying in every interview I've seen or read since ep7 dropped. But the season has made it very clear that there's much more than that going on with Daniel. Anger, yes, but also sadness, loneliness, confusion, a search for identity, a continued desire to 'get' the story, guilt towards Louis for publishing the book, a need for validation from Louis that they can still be friends despite it all. He's clearly drawn to Armand every time they're on screen together, they're companions and 'seeing' each other, and that rapture things is romantic AF even if it freaks them both out to a certain extent.
That's a lot of words to say that, yes, I do think we can still get the DM we were all hoping for, despite what Eric and Assad are saying about it in interviews.
I didn't like every choice that was made this season, but I feel like they did a beautiful job bringing certain scenes or sequences from the books alive in a way that feels very true to the source material. I have to believe that they'll be able to give us a version of DM that's true enough to book DM in spirit that it'll be satisfying. I just hope they'll get the screentime they need to properly develop.
I've pointed out before that a large chunk of QotD book is "what everyone is up to while Lestat was becoming a rockstar". I don't think they'll do away with that completely. Just because they didn't show us how DM ended up where they are at the end of this season doesn't mean they'll never show us. Rolin (who unfortunately sometimes is a liar who lies and makes baffling statements) 'promised' we'll see Daniel’s turning in S4 in one of the earliest 'Backstage Pass' interviews with TV Insider's Kelli Boyle, and has said LBF will be back in S4.
And these characters are still in the very early stages of getting (back) together. There are so many beautiful and/or heartwrenching places they can still go together, and I do think Daniel will - eventually - be the one to give Armand the love he needs and has always wanted.
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
There's a lot to like about devil's minion with Eric Bogosian Daniel, but one thing I've been thinking about is how unusual and wonderful it is to see an older man in a role like this? How rare it is to see a man in his 70s play a queer man in a mainstream network television show, and in a role where his queerness isn't a source of trauma and tragedy (the vampirism is much more of an issue). There are some older gay men and couples in media these days, but they're still unusual, and are more often middle aged rather than 70+. And this character, Daniel, a man that lived to 70 years old as a closeted man, who survived the AIDs crisis, finally able to pursue a gay relationship openly. Who was loved and desirable in his 20s and is loved and desirable in his 70s. Armand that has just as much love for him in his old age, who isn't bothered by his looks changing, and loves him all the same. A character for whom reaching his old age wasn't the end of his life, but the start of something new. An older man that is canonically bisexual, who is romantically pursued by a younger man, who is just as compelling of a character as any other in the show. I think it's really wonderful??
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
Are you still optimistic about Devils Minion despite the interviews?
Yes i am. And unless the show actually ends up throwing a completely ruined Devil‘s Minion storyline in my face next season, i’m choosing to stay hopeful. Of course i’m a bit scared because Devil‘s Minion means a lot to me, but i‘m not going to spend the next two years stressing myself out. At least not too much 😄
I also recommend that you ignore the interviews. We’ve seen time and time again that things said in interviews often don‘t end up playing out that way on screen. They can’t spoil major storylines, so they’re naturally going to be careful about what they reveal.
It also helps me to know just how much Devil‘s Minion means to both Eric and Assad, and i trust that they would fight for the story if things ever really got out of hand. Don‘t forget that Eric spent two hours arguing on the phone with Rolin (I think it was Rolin) because he didn’t like what was in the script! And he managed to get it changed, so…🌝🙏
Call me petty, immature I do nawt care but it pleases me to see Eric haters get so fucking gagged at the idea that Assad and other cast members may genuinely like being around him on a regular basis.
Fuck em!
“He’s a very attractive man as well. READ EM AND WEEP!!!! ASSAD WANTS THAT MAN CARNALLY!!!! That’s everyone’s baby!!!!!
