(Probably) hot take: I don't need Lestat to be a good person to "fall in love" with his character. We don't like the villains only when they're actually good or at least relatable/somewhat justified. There's more to it and it's more about the character being well-written.
true, i should‘ve made it clearer tbh, but when discussing lestat i‘m mostly talking about the fact that he feels like a flat one dimensional evildude considering the crew was incorporating later works into the script
@@shashatainment oh, all clear now! I think you'll enjoy the 2nd season then if you haven't seen it already! I think it all round adds more complexity without compromising on the severity of the 1st season events. Also you slay!!!!!!!!!!! (This last bit is important)
@@lukailincic2411 thank uu! i didn‘t watch it before the vid to not get confused on the timeline and or character writings, but i‘ve seen 2 eps after and i can‘t wait for s3 since they announced it‘ll be based on tvl so i‘m hoping for more complexity there as well as the second half of s2
There was a news anchor in 94 who reviewed the movie and said “Not gay enough.” HE WAS RIGHT. EDIT: it was a JOKE. I know the time period was too conservative and wouldn’t have realistically given us GAY Pitt, Cruise AND AB. I can just be sad they didn’t, okay. And per a comment, this was a sketch joke. So it wasn’t serious to begin with.
I actually really liked how making Louis Black, and a Black brothel owner descended from a Black plantation owner, tied back into the vampirism theme and made it deeper. The show specifically retains the fact that Louis' ancestor was a plantation owner, despite being Black, and Louis kind of continues the same pattern by "exploiting his own kind" to get by. He clearly wants to be part of the "superior" race/class and fit in and be respected and successful, but it's unclear how much of it is his own personal ambition and how much of it is an attempt at escaping the prejudice and exploitation that awaits him otherwise (there's a scene early on where he laments that racism ruined his family's plantation business and it sounds like it's not slavery per se that he's opposed to, but the fact that Black people can't profit off of it anymore). Which is, you know, sort of exactly the same thing as what happens when he becomes a vampire, but his specific background makes him able to reflect on it and pick up on the pattern more. Because the fact is, vampires DID use to be human, and they are absolutely exploiting their own kind to avoid an extremely undesirable state (death, weakness) that awaits them otherwise. But unlike white European Lestat, who thinks that his state of superiority is a completely natural state of things, Louis becomes more and more aware of this dynamic the more he thinks. I thought this was a cool way of making a character who was so up his own ass in the book more dynamic and complex, while also saying something about modern respectability politics that contemporary audiences can recognize and identify with. You know, the themes of alienation and belonging nowhere as a vampire but also the alienation that comes from downplaying and separating yourself from your race and where you come from.
yess, i thought it added a lot to the narrative, and listening to the crew discuss it (if im not mistaken jacob anderson goes into detail on s1 eo 3 of the podcast) was really fascinating - especially because we see the Othering that has been present in vamp media since victorian times & how it manifests differently on diff stages of louis‘ story
He's not descended from a black plantation owner. He's descended from a white plantation owner and he's life as a mixed man adds to that power imbalance and he's social standing before even becoming a vampire and how it affects how looks at things. We can see it a lot in season 2 in Paris with the Algerian comment.
I agree. Making Louis black in this time period only added another layer to the show. What bothers me the people who are calling Lestat a jim crow racist. I never felt that any of Lestat's power plays were about race, but just a power play within a relationship. Lestat loves Louis and Louis feels love for Lestat. ❤
I actually found Louis’ fragmented memory of his past with Lestat to be really relatable and validating. Repeated cycles of abuse can result in trauma that can affect the brain to such a degree that memories become fragmented - kind of like blurry photos or a book with pages missing. Realising that you can’t trust your own memory/account of your own experiences is terrifying, particularly in a situation where you know/suspect you can’t trust those around you. How are you ever supposed to look back, reflect and try to unpack a violent situation for what it was if you can’t trust your own recollection of events?
beautifully put, thanks for such an insightful comment! i loved the moment in s2 when louis and daniel piece the story together, imo it adds to the narrative about the cycle of abuse
Sam Reids voice in that role holds such a vampiric tone for me. His way of alluring Louis fits so perfectly to their chemistry. The acting is absolutely top notch. I havent been so into a show in such a long time. Oh and I love armands casting. That stare.
Wildest thing to me about the 94 movie is that while they "had" to majorly tone down the homosexual content and themes, they still had a scene of a literal child kissing a literal adult. I know that in the context of the story she isn't a child, but in real life Kirsten was a child. Being gay was a no no, but kissing a child? Apparently that's fine🤢
both of the aspects were toned down btw, if i‘m not mistaken, the 1994 movie doesn’t have claudia sleeping in the same coffin as louis (when she‘s still a child, the book frames it as a normal child-parent thing with no weird undertones, so i‘d rather they kept that)
i watched the movie the other night for the first time after watching both seasons and actually she does sleep in the same coffin as louis. Very much framed as a parent kid co sleeping situation.
Jacob Anderson's performance in the show is so incredible. I didn't sit down and watch the show all the way through until s2 premiered (for mental health reasons lol), but I would watch his confessional monologue over and over again, just absolutely enthralled. I do really enjoy Sam Reid's Lestat (and Baily, Assad, and Delainey), but it's Anderson's performance that convinced me to watch the show. The man just fucking kills it every goddamn week. The fact he hasn't been nominated for anything is a crime.
Jacob Anderson is also my favorite thing about this show. I never really bought Brad Pitt's performance as Louis, but Jacob really brought him to life. Just incredible!
I couldn't agree more! I wasn't really sold on the time jump at first. Then, I saw Jacob Anderson's performance and I was sold! He is a brilliant actor. I never really liked Louis in the books or in the movie, but I find myself hanging on Anderson's every word or look. He's amazing. I want to see him front-and-center in more films and TV shows.
It's like you took the words out of my mouth. He is the main reason I love this show. The other "more fun" characters usually get the most attention, but for me, Jacob Anderson's portrayal of Louis captivated me from the very start. He's truly underrated. I really hope he stays as one of the main characters in season 3 and onwards.
@@shashatainment wow I'm so happy for you I hope you enjoy this precious time together! 🙏❤️🩹 unfortunately my friends have different priorities so...I guess I have to tie them up to a chair
I think aging up a child character playing older beyond her years is a way to stave off people using the live-action content of real children for fantasies of abuse.
I'm not sure about that. Honestly, I think it really has more to do with practical concerns of it being harder to keep a child actor for multiple seasons without them being re-cast or looking different. I also think that they wanted to give Louis more of an equal partner in Claudia, and that it would have been difficult to portray this as well with a 5-year-old actor.
Yeah and they didn't show the cough cough assault scene with Claudia and literally had Louis tell us in the show that he wouldn't exploit her tragedy like that 😊
I feel that this monstrous way of showing Lestat creates an interesting dilemma for the audience. He has a magnetism that makes me need to continue seeing him but being aware that he is a monster. I find it interesting, especially if we compare it with the way in which all villains are so romanticized lately. Btw, I loooved your outfit and makeup 💗
So true! I think this also applies to their relationship. Even though it is absolutely toxic and unhealthy their dynamic is so good that I want them to stay together. After we find out that Armand & Louis are together now, and have a 'healthy' relationsship the show also throws me into that moral dillema. Their relationship lacks the intensety and insane love, so that I mourn the loss of Lestat. Even though I know that Louis is doing better now, with a 'good' partner. (In hindsight there were signs that Armand wasn't that good, but I personally did not spot them D: )
@@blue-guymaster5121 Yes, I think the difference is that Lestat and Louis really loved each other but in a really monstrous way (because that's what they are), while Armand tried to keep control over Louis in that delusion of neatness and inocence
i’m almost done w season 2 as of now (like 6 eps in), and i’m really enjoying how the creators amped up molloy’s persistence by giving him extra material
I'm stunned at how Louis is portrayed in the show. So much better than the film, which paints him as sweet and nice, when he's toxic af bc of course he is, he loves Lestat, hes no boy scout😅. Love the show, it's so well done and gives way more dimension to the characters.
I do like that even though they kept Louis’s POV, they added nuance in terms of his character and his assessment of himself (which imo aligns with him growing older and more mature)
Hmm,perhaps I'm a bit biased, but Louis is something of a toxic drama queen & a manipulative, not too honest, self proclaimed victim in the books as well. we find out in the second book most of his interview was a lie or at least repainting of the truth. Luis of the film is fairly similar to his original book 1 version. We see him in a positive light as it's HIS version of events, but he certainly isn't an angel, which is soon confirmed by Lestat
I liked the 1994 movie, but I just love the series. There’s something really magnetic about Jacob and Sam. They are both fabulous looking, fit men and there’s a lot to be said for that for an old lady like me. The nature of the story, with its mostly singular POV puts a heavy burden on the actor that plays Louie and casting Jacob was a genius decision, he is such a powerhouse of an actor. I can go on and on about the great casting decisions.
Sam Reid is my Lestat . I grew up on the original movie and queen of the Damned and i don't think its even close. I can completely see why Loius would be seduced by Lestat in the series. I never bought that with Cruise as Lestat. He came off as a bitchy power Bottom to me lol Sam Reid OOZES sex, charisma, threat and emotion.
DISCLAIMER: I hate Cruise, so I can be a bit biased. But Sam's Lestat is my Lestat. I listened to the audiobooks these last weeks and kept picturing Sam's face as Lestat. Amazing casting.
I wholeheartedly agree! Sam Reid has made Lestat everything I imagined him to be in the books. The ego, the arrogance, all that is the Brat Prince. Hands down the best portrayal to date. The entire series has completely changed my opinion from first hearing the concept and plans to bring it to TV. I cannot wait for season 3! Each season is better than the last.
Now I need to hear what you think about season 2 and armand! The whole season has been great but 2x5 was one of the best episodes of TV I have seen in a while!
yesss ik the 2x05 has gotten an insanely high score i‘m hyped to see it (i losely know what happens cause ive been keeping up w the news and interviews but actually seeing it is gonna hopefully go so hard)
Assads Armand and Delaineys Claudia were the best!!! for me. I enjoyed them far more than Lestat and Luis. Even Santiago was great. But Tom Cruise‘ Lestat will always be my Lestat ❤
The best thing this show has done is turn Louis into an interesting character. He was sooo boring and insufferable in the books, he's become one of my favorite characters (only 2nd to Armand) and I can't get enough of him in the show. I hope he'll continue to be the main character in all seasons, Jacob Anderson truly deserves all the praise he gets
@@kaylarodrigues7892 frfr!! like i‘m not usually really interested in the acting if it‘s not Bad but his performance was so impressive i made a note about it!!
the writers are very smart and know how to handle topics like abuse delicately with firm sympathy for the victim. lestat being an abuser is very accurate to the books, not only to iwtv but to the rest of the vc as well. of course he is a complicated character and we will see his perspective in s3, but lestat can and has done things that are very very shitty and they will be given the weight they deserve in the narrative.
well, i’m still not caught up w season 2, so i sure do hope the gravity of the abuse is dealt with appropriately, however, my point was not about lestat being abusive, but about the powerbalance in the relationship and the severity of the abuse
I disagree I love the 1994 movie and I think all the actors did an amazing job. They brought us a rare movie in a time that movies like this was too much. The new TV series to be brought new universe of what if would of been like if Loui was black in a very difficult time which is so perfect for the story. I tend to see these 2 stories as yes same story but made in 2 different universes and perspectives of both this era and 1994. I respect and enjoy both story telling
I figured the reason they aged up Claudia in the show was that they were planning on having her show up for multiple seasons and kids can look radically different one year to the next as they age. Ended up not mattering cause they had to recast her anyway.
It is much more difficult to get a nuanced performance out of a child than it is a teenager or adult actress. Aging her up allowed for a more mature performance. A child can not accurately play an adult or understand being an adult because they are still developing. An adult or actual teenager can play a pre-teen/teenager trapped in eternal puberty much better because they've experienced it and their brains are much more developed. Kirsten Dunst explained in an interview what they had to do to get the performance out of her while remaining age appropriate and she had absolutely no idea what was actually going on. They had to explain a situation that a child would understand to get the correct reaction and emotion for the scene. Kirsten did a great performance as a child but I personally much prefer the more complex portrayal of the older actresses in the new adaptation.
I think it was because they have her do a scene where she has sex with a guy and is in a relationship with an adult woman. To have the actor be a child would not be great for that. Also because Claudia is a main character and the show is so much longer than the film and child labor laws are much stricter now
I never read the original books and getting into this show with no context has been hugely entertaining. 5 year old Claudia now lives in my nightmares, I much prefer her as teenager in the show!
yeah, she was based on anne rice’s young daughter that she lost and was a way for her to cope and grieve, hence the age afaik, but teenage claudia gives the creators possibilities to explore the topics from a different pov which i find very cool!
I'm a huge fan of the original books, especially the first three. Despite the changes to the time-frame, I feel the first season nurtured and respected every key beat from the original literature. Despite my initial reservations, it maintained the 'feel' of the books, whilst offering something new to existing fans. Was hoping for a slightly faded French accent...never expected it from an Aussie actor...so good!
Straight White Man here and I feel like I've been asked so... I began reading the books in the 90s as a teen. The homosexuality was made more palatable for me for two reasons. 1, she didn't explicitly describe the sex and 2, these are vampires not humans. What Ann Rice did was kind of like taking the homosexual subtext thing, later made well known from shows like Xena Warrior Princess, and inverted it a way. It was there, but if you didn't want it to be, there was a pass of sorts. A small concession to the straight people. And maybe even a light and subtle and very clever slap in the face. As for the new series: I love it. I've read all the books at least twice, listened to the very well performed audio-books a handful of times and of course seen the movies more times that I can count ( QoTD 3x ). I needed a fresh take and AMC has done a better job that I would have ever hoped for. A masterclass in writing, cinematography and of course, ACTING. Bravo!
I honestly don’t get everyone’s distain for this adaptation of Lestat, it felt so true to the books to me. But I guess that’s the beauty of art, it’s subjective.
Who's disdain lol? Maybe I'm just on the wrong (or right depending on how you look at it) side of the internet, but I've seen nothing but praise for this portrayal 🤷♀
I love this version. By far my favorite. Season one showed me he was a wildly romantic and as a force of nature, charming and charismatic and dangerous. Season two showed him as petty and regretful and, in the end, even somewhat pathetic. A lot of it has to do the with actor as well, as he's fire.
I think some people forget what he was like in IWTV and not say TVL or QoTD. And even then, ToTBT also shows some of his cruelty lol. Like he hits Nicki twice iirc in TVL lmao. He’s always been like that and that’s okay. You can still like him.
This is legitimately one of the best television shows of our time. The sets, cinematography, actors and their acting, the overall directing, the **adaptation of the writing, my god**. It's phenomenal. An absolute triumph.
It's sad that the network didn't do a better job promoting this series. Anne made an exclusive deal with AMC to have her works shown on their network *in perpetuity* . I would be busting my ass to promote the books and shows!
agreed, i think they are slowly improving though, like in the case of the trailer for s3 and reviews that treat the vampire lestat as a real band, but fans did a lot of the heavy lifting - that’s how i found out, at least
Jacob really decimated the role of Louis. I'm sooo happy with the changes to Louis character. Like I'm sorry but its really hard to feel sorry for a rich white slave owner 😢😂
This show is pure gold. The pacing is great, the make-up and costumes beautiful, the actors are excellent, the way it changed the source material but respected Anne's vision. It's great, I love it.
can't wait for you to watch the 2nd season and also the interviews coinciding them - particularly sam's most recent interview with autumnbrown. his take on lestat and this adaptation is so immaculate 😭💕
I feel like the 90s movie is getting shit on too much. They made it as gay as they could. Anyone whose head was out of their ass could tell they were _somewhere_ in the acronym. They gay coded as hard as they could get away with in the last millennium. It's unfair to say they didn't make it gay enough, at the time it was shockingly and obviously gay.
Gay or not Gay. The story was changed. And not just what job Louis had. Or the time frame. The characters were altered. Louis was mourning a "wife" Anne never gave him. A "child" he never had. Alters the whole Claudia storyline if Louis has lost a child. And all for what? The main story of most of Anne's Vampire Chronicles, is the relationship of Lestat and Louis. Anne went back to their relationship time and time again. They were way closer than the 1994 Movie allowed them to be.
I agree. I was 13 when I read the book and watched the movie - a couple of years after it actually came out. Even as a very young teenager, I absolutely understood that these vampires were being queer coded. There's just no other way to read it. Lestat and Louis are partners who live together and share a daughter. Later, Armand clearly wants Louis for himself. I was a child and I picked up on it. They made it as gay as they could at the time - and it was gay enough that even kids could read the not-so-subtle subtext. The vampire bite as a metaphor for sexuality - as much present in Dracula as in Interview - serves the same purpose. It creates subtext where overt text would be censored. I don't think I ever once questioned whether or not Louis and Lestat were in a relationship, just as I don't think I ever questioned the sexually charged nature of Dracula's bite. It was obvious, juuuust barely skating underneath the line of what would get greenlit or published at the time. I DO like that the show makes that more explicit than the original book or the movie could in their time periods. I think it's making the subtext text in a way that it always deserved to be, but it's unfair to judge a 30-year-old movie adaptation of a nearly 50-year-old book by the standards of 2024. I think we can celebrate positive steps forward in representation without denigrating older artists who were simply trying to exist within the constraints set forth in their own times.
@@sircharlesmormont9300 topics of sexuality and queerness are not subtext in anne rice’s work - sure, the first book is tamer than the others, but it still openly points to the sexually charged nature of the bite, equaliting it to a sexual act (i.e. the quite i used in the video), and the reason people could consider its queerness subtext is probably only the absense of a proper tag on the relationships. the movie is toned down in comparison, and me pointing out these differences is not in any way degrading or belitteling the honest efforts of those involved with the production, and i even point to reasons for it.
Their choice to make Louis black is one of the few times in media changing the race of the character ACTUALLY matters and ENHANCES the story. Louis’ story is so much richer when you add the racial aspects.
and if i told u the cast & creator interviews were fascinating (eric bogosian keeps spoiling stuff cause he‘s got no filter, sam reid is posessed by lestat, assad zaman thought he was fr gonna play a random dude named rashid)
I recently listened to a Podcast with Sam Reid and he was describing what all was going down between the characters in the second season, and his take was that everything was just incredibly f*cked up, all that he was doing, what has happening, it was just all unfolding in such a sadistic way for his character. I like that the writers and the actors have continued to say, we have not yet seen "real Lestat." I think of it as if we sat there and described a horrible ex. We'd paint them as the absolute worst, but what do we leave out, right, we leave out any good they ever did, how we managed to fall in love with them (b/c sane people don't fall in love initially with a-holes), and it would be our narrative that ultimately makes us out to be the better person. That's season 1&2. As far as the change in Claudia's age, there will always be the issue of Claudia's age within the context of the real world. There was quite a bit of gore and violence, a lot of sexual themes like rape, human body parts, relationships with adults, and other characters that Claudia participates in or witnesses or is the victim of. I remember people flipping out at the movie because Dunst kissed Pitt's Louis or slept in the coffin with him, even though both were relatively innocent gestures. It's the implication behind them and of course the real actresses age at the time, that were of great issue in a seemingly more morally stringent world of the early 90s. Well, I mean, we still take issue with Twilight and a 200 year old trying to date a 17 year old which they got around by him waiting until she was 18, so you know, totally fine there as long as he looks young (sarcasm).
yess regarding what sam said i am so hyped for s3 but i was expecting a little more nuance to lestat in s1 considering what was mentioned in the interviews and podcasts :(
I say all of this with love, as a Brad Pitt fan I'm terribly biased to the 1994 movie. I love it despite any of its flaws because it was the first vampire movie i saw that got me into the genre. I also say that, to say, that there are later interviews with Brad admitting that he didn't want to do the movie but was contracted and wasnt able to get dropped from the film. Which might be why his acting might seem subpar, byt his brooding came from actually not wanting to be there🤷🏽♀️. I wish i could find the source, if i do ill come back and post the link. (Even if you're just not a BP fan in general thats cool) I just wanted to share that info cause the Brad Pitt slander made me laugh😅
my take on the shows lestst as someone who never read the book or watched the movie, and really got invested once I found out that Louis was a black gay man and played by Jacob Anderson; it really doesn't bother me that they make him to be so violent and at time so cruel. I 110% do understand why lestat fans were so mad at episode 5 because when you take away the DV aspect lestat is fun, morally grey, and chaotic and a bit of a pathetic loser but it does make him loveable. however him committing demoestic violence makes sense for this narrative (and yes even after what we find out about the scene in season two it still is DV.) The show lestat did hide a lot of things about vampirism from Louis and Claudia, which added to the power imbalance in their relationship. he's very insecure about Louis loving him back, during season one I thought it was because he wanted unconditional love from Louis, even though he failed to unconditionally love Louis and often resented the fact that Louis didn't accept vampirism, but season two implies it's because he feared that Louis would leave him. regardless, I think the DV does make sense in this narrative.
glad to hear that it was handled well in s2 (that was my main concern and i‘m not that far yet), while this portrayal of lestat is not my fav, but i love the way sam reid talks about the character and it gives me hope for a possibly more nuanced portrayal in the future seasons + as long as the topic of dv is handled with care it is obviously ok within the narrative,
@@shashatainment My interpretation of the added scenes in season two is to show that Louis wasn't the perfect victim and that Louis stood up for Claudia more than he gives himself credit. Also, I would love to hear your thoughts about season two :)
@@rifa1673 oo, sounds promising! i’m also very interesting at how the show will deal w the imperfect victim (as almos every victim is in the eyes of the society supporting perpetrators) point, and i am planning to make a vid about season two once i’m done with my term papers - i wanted to reread the second half of iwtv again to get my facts straight
Anne Rice was correct because the new show allows us to see each characters dynamic fundamentally changes throughout every episode. I love seeing how the story develops each reboot tbh. Hopefully they give me 3 more seasons. This movie was my roman empire.
personally I love both the film and the show for different reasons. i wouldn't pick one over the other. i feel like the show did an amazing job at adding depth to louis's character, and I think the whole race swap thing actually made him and the story more interesting. also the actors did such a phenomenal job. The show fleshes out the characters more, because they have more time DUH. And the story is suitable for modern audiences. In 1994 they couldn't have possibly gone thorugh with making the film any gayer, but that's fine with me. Homoeroticism is fun. And I personally LOVED Tom Cruise and Kirsten Dunst in the film. Don't get me wrong, Sam Reid's Lestat is amazing, but he is a different character. WHICH IS GREAT. But to me Cruise's Lestat is still THE gold standard of vampires for me. I love both their portrayals, but something about cruise's Lestat was very addictive. He managed to make Lestat such an interesting and charming villain in whatever little time he had, and it's not because of the screen writing or dialogues or anything like that. It's way he spoke his lines, his body language. So, honestly? I could never pick a favourite among the two.
Anybody who's actually taken the time to watch the show will know the show is better. It gave Louis so much more depth and made him feel more real and well rounded. Something the movie and not even the book made me feel about Louis. And Sam Reid brought Lestat to life in a way no other actor could do before him. The show is so good I feel like AMC is failing to promote it properly. You can tell a lot of love and passion was poured into the show.
I just finished the 2nd season really good show. Great video. I 1st watched the show almost 2 years ago, i thought the film was decent but the show blew me away. The actor of lestat is so good, everyone does so good. Its Crazy the armand actor hasnt been really in anything either. In the 2nd season he had an amazing performance, i hope all these actors get big film roles in future and more known, they deserve it.
Love this video, I never got into Anne Rice books (and the movies, pheeeewieee) but the show really gripped me from the first episode. Thanks for all the citations listed, it's nice to have them in a document.
I love how obsessed with vampires you are. (not sarcastic) Lestat to me is a really good example of bisexuality as monstrous. His sexual fluidity is a prominent part of his character and why he's so evil, compared to Louis, who is just gay. He's a beautiful, hypersexual monster. A literal predator. He's how we as a society view bisexual men. And even Louis, a gay man, views Lestat as monstrous while he is normal. I see this view from gay people towards bisexuals and others in the community. They're normal and good, not like the other queers. Sorry Louis, you're just as toxic as Lestat. Louis being an unreliable toxic partner of a messy evil bisexual man is so much better than any version which takes him at his word. "Is he really that evil, or is he just French?!" I'm fucking dying.
I love this analysis so much although there are 2 points I absolutely don't agree with. The first one wanting Lestat to be a good person. As an ancient vampire with a history of being abused, I don't expect him to turn that around and be mature, him being a bad person is something I expect. Second, your commentary of what happened to Claudia. What happened with Bruce didn't make her "stronger" and I don't see it at all like that, it made her bitter and even more resentful of Louie, she closed herself, she was in search of a companion who didn't wrong her. What thoughten her up wasn't the grape, it was age, reading, Lestat education and the death of her first lover. Bruce only gave trauma and took the light of her. That is very much illustrated when she speaks of the ordeal.
thank u for the well thought out comment! regarding the point about lestat: i don’t want him to be a goody two-shoes, i just did not expect him to be this flat of a character (combined with the changed power dynamic) since the crew talked about incorporating tvl into the 1st season - the person whose comment i pinned expressed it very well, and it was fr bad phrasing on my part, i should’ve made it clearer. regarding the claudia part: it is not so clear cut, as the show imo still follows a lot of characteristics of “sa makes a female character stronger&tougher” trope, namely (again, to me) it seems to coincide with her starting to act more mature and decisive afterwards, but i agree that it is largely in the eye of the beholder with this case.
Yeah, I'm so shocked that people saw what happened to Claudia and thought it was a make her stronger narrative. It didn't make her stronger, it was just part of the trauma that a girl like her in this world like ours has. It shows that Claudia existence in this world is a constant pain like most women and how much that's confuded by her being stuck in a small body
Love the movie but the show is superior in every way i hated movie Louis I adore series Louis especially now that show caught up with the movie and the book its safe to say the show is better
@@shashatainment yeah movie Louis just looked bored 24/7 like he had the same face extortion the entire movie tv Louis tho needs every award possible he was incredible
Interesting remarks about Lestat and his arc in s01, I've read Interview with the vampire 15 years ago, so maybe it's more an impression at this point, but I really hated Lestat in the book, and I cheered Claudia and Louis when they killed him. In the book he felt so much more controlling, always keeping them ignorant, not sharing anything he didn't have to about vampirism, I felt like Louis and Claudia were his hostages and not family, so I thought that the extreme violence of ep5 was good equivalent to get us to the point of hating Lestat and being happy for Claudia and Louis to be free in the series Also, I love the decision the show made about explicit queerness, I'm ace, and I'd love some asexual rep too, but I feel that asexuality coming as a part of being a vampire and not a human wouldn't be my first choice. Interesting concept in the books, but I don't read it as exploration of asexuality and more of separation between being a vampire and human
i’ve read it recently and i’d say that the controlling/abuse side is present in the book, but the degree of it is not as severe, as louis himself states he could (and did) stand up to lestat. asexual rep would be very cool tbh, hope we get that in later seasons :)
@@shashatainment "as louis himself states he could (and did) stand up to lestat" then i can guess you will like what they did in s2 regarding that fight
I started the series with 0 context, loved it and fell in love with Lestat’s character, he was really fun to watch and so unpredictable. When I finally watched the movie I was VERY disappointed, I thought I would’ve loved Tom Cruise in this role (he looked great from what I had seen) but he was so bland compared to Sam Reid’s version + I thought he had very little chemistry with Brad Pitt. What saved this movie for me was Kirsten Dunst as Claudia, I loved everything about her from the amazing performance to her beautiful dresses and curly hair, she really looked like a victorian porcelain doll. I understand that they probably didn’t want to hire a child actress for the tv show, and I think they did a great job. (btw, someone needs to cast Sam Reid as Dorian Gray ASAP)
I have only heard one person (you) say they didn't absolutely LOVE Sam Reid as Lestat. He's everything I pictured for the character (and I was around for the movie as well). No judgement, everyone has their tastes but I thought Sam Reid was incredible in the role. I haven't seen a role that well cast in ages
I did mention how I love Reid’s approach and portrayal, my beef is with how it was hyped up to be Lestat from the further books in the season 1 promo, which ultimately did not end up to be the case 🤨
In the film’s defense, I watched it as a kid without knowing ANYTHING about it or the books and immediately went ‘oh they’re gay’. I haven’t read the books, so I believe you that the claim that they’re ‘just as gay’ is wrong. But I do think it might be unfair to judge it by the standards of modern queer media. For an early 90s movie (especially a major blockbuster with two ‘leading man’ types), I think it’s pretty blatant about it’s queerness, you’d have to be totally obtuse to come out thinking these are two perfectly heterosexual men. Idk, not that we can’t compare/criticize, but I do think it was probably about as gay as it could have been for the time.
This show is near perfection. 4:51 It says a LOT when the ONLY negative audience reviews on Rotten Tomatoes are (clearly) from bigoted trolls says a lot. There’s no real substantive complaint to be made. The acting is perfect, the writing is smart and refreshing for a well known story, the production value is up there with Game of Thrones… I remember asking myself “why do we need this?” When I first heard of the series. Now I totally get it. Her books deserved this series.
i think there are some things about the show that are up for debate taste-wise, like the styling, etc, but the majority of the comments that were talking about how the show is bad (under this vid) was fr comprised of weirdos talking about it being “too gay” and “anti-white” (ngl the last one got me so confused like…ok have they never seen a poc before???), so i do agree that a loooot of negativity comes from simple bigotry
I had vaguely heard of this adaptation but forgot about it because I figured they would adapt them as accurately as the movies. I’m so grateful to have stumbled upon this video and your channel. I’m literally heading upstairs to watch the series now.
Great Video. I kind of love that the only thing we love about Lestat is his good looks. (And Sam Reid's incredible acting.) I'd LOVE to hear your thoughts on season 2 because Claudia is heartbreakingly good and it's such a devastating season. I'm so happy it got picked up for season 3.
yesss i’ve only seen 2 episodes of s2 (obviously im aware of what happens there but yk can’t form a solid opinion without actually watching it!) and i think bailey’s claudia flows so efforrlessly into delainey’s as delainey’s take on the chacacter has a more mature feel to it which aligns with her age and what she has been through + i think the actress change fits neatly into the narrative of memory warping things!
Hello Shastainment, Despite my many issues with the unnecessary changes they made on the show, it was still a good adaption of the book, but not great, I am still looking forward to the upcoming third season which will adapt "The Vampire Lestat" & set up "Queen of the Dammed" since they named dropped Akasha in the finale last night. Love the 1994 big-screen adaption as it retained the gothic atmosphere of the book, which the show has lacked & was a more faithful retelling of the book. As much as I love what Jacob Anderson & Sam Reid have done for the characters of Louie & Lestat as well as the two girls who played Claudia, they don't come close to the magnetism or level of depth that Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt & Kirsten Dunst had as Lestat, Louis & Claudia. You couldn't help, but root for them as you experienced their pain & their pleasure. At times, it seems like these actors on the show were just going through the motions & in my opinion, they were far too old to play Lestat & Louis. Plus, Claudia's death & Louis' revenge hit harder in both the book & the film & was more satisfying, plus both these elements were more iconic in the book & film. Plus, Louis' revenge seemed rushed in the finale. But despite these issues with the show, I'm still willing to give it a chance because I'm curious to see what they will do next. The 2002 screen adaption of "Queen of the Dammed" was terrible, the only bright spots were Stuart Townsend as Lestat & the late great Alliyiah as Akasha. Something I hope they correct for the TV adaption.
thanks for the well thought out comment! i felt different about almost everything you brought up, but it is a taste-based thing at the end of the day, so the show might be my favorite adaptation but not yours, and that’s ok :) i’m hyped for season 3 too, especially considering the fact that the creators cited rocky horror as an inspo for rockstar lestat!
@@shashatainment The Vampire Chronicles are to the Vampire Genre, what the Dune Saga is to the Sci-Fi Genre. It redefined the genre for a whole generation & beyond. My hope is they retain the grandness & epic scope of the later books as they explore some very profound themes, such as the origin of the vampire race. Heck they even have Lestat meeting both God & the Devil in one book & he literally witnesses the creation of the universe, including Satan's fall from grace & goes on a tour of both Heaven & Hell and witnesses the Crucifixion & drinks from the blood of Christ. How more epic can you get than that? How do you think they will be able to adapt that for television? All, I know is if they can pull it off, I'm on board.
This show is near perfection. 4:51 It says a LOT when the ONLY negative audience reviews on Rotten Tomatoes are (clearly) from bigoted trolls says a lot. There’s no real substantive complaint to be made. The acting is perfect, the writing is smart and refreshing for a well known story, the production value is up there with Game of Thrones… I remember asking myself “why do we need this?” When I first heard of the series. Now I totally get it. Her books deserved this series.
The only changes I really didnt like were the points of cruel domestic abuse. In the books, Lestat essentially doesn't put his hands on either of them in that way (the drop from the sky having a totally different context). It's a really weird addition considering that later seasons will focus on Lestat and eventually bring him and Louis back together. It's an irresponsible way to portray abuse. In the books, it's way more gray area and truly can be a "he said she said" type thing. In the show, the misremembering has to be so great to make Lestat look better. His cruelty towards Claudia is never addressed or retconned. Idk, I love lestat and the series but that's the one change I really couldn't get behind the most
вы убедили меня наконец-то посмотреть этот сериал (вместе с тамблером и моим другом, лол) :) отличное видео, как всегда, надеюсь рубашка в итоге отстирается ❤
сначала думала, что не осилю целое видео в один заход, но ты так круто и точно обо всем рассказываешь, что время вообще незаметно проходит! спасибо з такую объемную работу, надеюсь тебе понравится второй сезон!!
спасибо за добрые слова!! пока что (я только два эпизода успела посмотреть тк специально не смотрела в то время как делала этот ролик, чтобы ниче не напутать) очень нравится, плюс судя по интервьюхам и реакциям аудитории вообще что-то с чем-то :) надеюсь как будет время сделать подобный ролик про второй сезон
thank you for making this ❤ I saw the 1994 film as an (undiagnosed autistic, ~10yo or less) kid who was already obsessed with vampires and writing stories about them. after that, the original Vampire Chronicles book trilogy was absolutely foundational for me as a lover and writer of horror. that part of me is dying to watch this clearly well-made show full of sweaty queer representation. but as a transmasc survivor of domestic violence, I normally avoid shows for much less than the DV I know is very much present at least in S1. so while I try to decide whether this show is likely to trigger/help me cathart/both, I am living vicariously through cast interviews and video essays like yours!
Got on the hype train late too and was also surprised at how smart the writting feels, every change is so interesting a lot more is adapted and they still managed to adapt some of the movie vibe. With the story mainly set in Louisiana this new version of Louis makes a lot of sense and feel fresh for old fans. There's a real sense that he thinks being a vampire gives him access to white privilege at some point.
thank u!! i‘m loving it so far & i‘m most hyped for 2x05 & 2x07 and hopefully i‘ll put out a vid in like a few months once i‘m done with big uni projects
Little correction, Anne Rice vampires have sexual relationships, but that is way in the later books of the Vampire Chronicles, maybe the last three or four books prior her death, hell, Lestat have sex with a woman in Prince Lestat the last book that she wrote prior her death, but he did after drinking blood, the reason is the popularity of Sookie Southern Mysteries or True Blood, that ironically was based on Anne Rice books, imagine how incestual this two sagas are.
yeah, as I said i‘m specifically dealing with first 2 books, since the creators made no reference to any of the later ones being used for the sexuality aspect of vampires
I think it’s so interesting when people say brad Pitt is a bad actor. Especially for the movie cuz he wasn’t imo it was just the direction. The show will always dominate tho..from casting all the way to wardrobe..absolutely stunning show! And so refreshing
I personally don't like how they made the vampires sexually active. Anne's vampires are asexual, yet still manage to be both sensual and erotic and I like that, as a "gray A" myself. The show focused so much on interpersonal relationships that at times it felt like I was just watching a show about humans who sometimes drink blood. This will also change things if/when they do "Tale of the Body Thief," which I think is at least planned due to them already introducing Raglan James. One of Lestat's primary motivations was getting to have sex for the first time in a couple hundred years, that will be off the table as a carrot for Raglan to dangle in front of him ;) I'm also not understanding why they changed them from being literally forced unconcious by the sun to being able to chill all day until they feel like going to sleep. Again with Body Theif, when Lestat decides to see if he can off himself in the sun, he goes out into the middle of the Gobi desert and starts flying up to *meet* the sunrise, knowing he needs to get as high as he can before the sun hits him because he will be forced unconcious as soon as it does. His body then digs into the sand pretty much on his own after he hits the ground. Armand does the same in Memnoch. Due to the changes the show writers made, they're going to have to have them change their minds about it instead of committing 100% but still failing. I freaking LOVE Sam Reid as Lestat, all the actors are great, the acting is great, the casting is great and even the writing is good, I just don't understand why they have humanized the vampires so much; the preternatural element is missing from a show about preternatural creatures.
Demi here and this, THIS is my problem. I haven't started and I think I'll stay with the book (I don't really care for the 1994 movie either except for the costumes) because I don't get my asexual and very vampire-y vampires, I'll be getting True Blood in Anne Rice flavor it looks like. :(
So glad to have found this comment. Anne rice’s interpretation of vampirism is such a frustratingly perfect opportunity to actualize all that being ace entails to a wide audience. I feel like a lot of the media I enjoy happens to be hypersexualized and i don’t gravitate to it BECAUSE of the sexual content it’s just inescapable. I can’t say I haven’t been enjoying the show but that distinction definitely is a lingering irk.
I knew that the anti-france sentiment couldn't be anything but European, or at least by someone whose country was fucked over by napoleon. You did not disappoint
i absolutely loved the show, however i felt claudia's assault was particularly unnecessary and disrespectful especially the way louis didn't let the reporter read her diary entry about it he literally robbed her of her ability to speak on her trauma and life experience but also what i love about the show is how everyone is allowed to do things that are wrong (far too rare in modern television) i still would like to see claudia's own perspective on events at some point
hey shasha, brad pit and tom cruse did a fantastic job on the first movie, i will always love their acting and their contributions to ann rices movie, now this new series is pumped up on steroids, and meat and potatoes, sam reid is a perfect lestat, and sam reid looks like what a true fallen angel would look like man and women, and, sound like his voice, hes so beautiful and total package hes so wonderful to look at, and his arrogant attitude is brilliant. and jacob"s beautiful eyes and acting and story telling is deep detail, this series will make rolland and a.m.c. a ton of money, cause its bringing things that we only dream of come true thru this series.
If I'm not mistaken, there has been a lot of discourse over the years relating to Claudia's age and the nature of her and Louis' relationship. Through the source material, we see that their love is not quite sibling, not quite parent-child, but something difficult to portray visually in the current landscape of things. Claudia is in love with Louis, and I think that is reciprocated in a non-physical way -- despite that, I think it's seen as inappropriate, placing Louis in the position of a groomer. While the show shys away entirely from the depth of that affection, there is also something to be said about having a child actor portray certain aspects of this character that may be downright disturbing for someone under a certain age. Kirsten Dunst was brilliant in the 1994 movie, but I always wondered how she felt as a child portraying someone much older going through such a physical, existential crisis. I could see an adolescent struggle with body dysmorphia without proper care during the production and after. TLDR: Some people think there's a creep factor to the Louis/Claudia dynamic (something I think is more fandom and less canon) and I think the show was just trying to cover it's bases by aging her up.
yes, i remember that being a big point of discussion when it came to the movie specifically, and how it was in the works for a long time partly because of the fear of backlash from conflating the topic of grooming with homosexuality, and i am grateful that the show makes more of a distinction between romantic & sexual and family&sibling feelings considering the current political climate
This video finally got me to settle down and watch the show (after two failed attempts) and I love it! It’s an awesome show to sit and watch to kick off spooky season.
Fantastic breakdown. Book kept me company while trying to adapt to a new country in my teens and while this show took alot of artistic liberties, i absolutely effing love it.
AMC by a huge margin. I can't imagine anyone else but Sam Reid as Lestat now. I just hope they go all in with the music angle and actually give us The Vampire Lestat as a band.
11:20 i think the fangs could’ve been retractable on a cgi scale for that time, as the lost boys seems to have it (or similar effects) and it was several years before iwtv
Your analysis is excellent. I especially loved the way you had black creators clips to examine the New Louis and his reality. For me it was a pleasure to watch and listen to you describe the differences between the way Interview: the book, the movie and this new iteration were created, performed and seen. Thank you.
thank u for the nice comment :) it’s not my place to talk about black people’s experiences, plus i’ve never been to the us and simply do not know enough, so it was important to me to base the section on the material by people who actually know what they’re talking about
I'm so glad the show Interview with the Vampire got renewed for Season 3 , I'm incredibly hyped to see Rock Star Lestat i need to see Sam Reid Lestat in the coolest rockstar clothes Lol and I'm so excited to see this because the Queen of the Damned movie should not be the only adaptation of the Vampire Lestat and Queen of the Damned in our lifetime Lol 😂🤦
@@roderick8167 well, considering that armand brought up 18th century and the theater in s2, they might keep the beginning the same as the books, but might also flip that as a lie 🤷🏻♂️ cause some of what armand says in 2x03 does not align with what is mentioned in tvl (dk about tva, didn‘t get to it yet)
@@roderick8167 idk if they‘re gonna be adapting the entirety of tvl (if they were i‘d say akasha), but regardless i‘m most interested to see what they do with the rockstar storyline considering the timeline has been moved around (praying we do NOT get soundcloud rapper lestat, he‘s already french, that‘s too many struggles in one character)
Just binged season 1 on Netflix and I really hope that adding the amc catalogue to a wayyyyyy bigger audience will make it go far :) hoping the agreement keeps production in amc’s hands. Random but something I liked and read in a review comparing Daniel to Anthony bourdain in how they made him interesting in this adaptation and I couldn’t agree more
I hated Tom Cruise as Lestat. But actually liked Brad Pitt as Louis. I watched the 1994 version and immediately bought most of the collection. Certain books I liked while others I could not grasp. Just in my stupid head I guess. I hated QOTD movie except for Akasha played by Aaliyah. Stuart Townsend did a way better version of Lestat, even though I hated the contacts for the eyes of everyone during that whole movie. PLUS, QOTD was a absolute horrible movie. You cannot interpret 3 books into ONE 2 hour movie. Just as bad as any of the Crow part 2, 3.....I could go on. I just had to disagree about Louis on that one note.
thanks for sharing! to each their own i guess since i cannot stand brad pitt‘s take on louis, but like, what am i gonna do with the fact that other people may enjoy it? nothing, none of my business - don‘t really remember that much about the qotd movie, i think i‘ve seen it as a child but never felt the need to rewatch
@@shashatainment He was given a job to do, and in fact, it was the directors choice in everything that had to do with the movie. Sign of the times in all that was done. Brad was the obvious choice on how he looked, But he was directed on his show of emotion. Maybe if BP was given a choice he would have done it different. But I do enjoy his performance especially after Claudia. Given the time it was riveting.
Thank you for the in depth analysis. I agree the changes the showrunners decided on make for a much more interesting show. I’m still curious what Bryan Fuller would have done.
my main concern with bryan fuller would‘ve been whether he would the queer stuff mostly subtext or go all out tbh. but would looove to know how his version would‘ve looked
I hope you all realize that Anne pitched this show. First to Paramount. Then AMC. She rejected Paramount edits. And literally walked away from them and to AMC. So yes, the showrunners had input. But Anne and her son brought the basic outline of how they wanted it to be adapted for this series. Some viewers think that Anne was completely out of the picture, because she had passed away by the time the show premiered. But it takes a long time to produce and film a series. Again, this adaptation was outlined by Anne herself.
@@donny1960 hi! nobody said Anne Rice or Christopher had nothing to do with it, like i literally quote their posts about the show in the first chapter 🤷🏻♂️ but there is no record of which changes were implemented by her and no interviews (that i could find) of her talking about them, so the quotes i pulled were from the showrunners and writers
@@shashatainment Annes web page was still up when the 1st season premiered, might still be. She talked extensively about the AMC show and had input in the screen play. Again, she talks about it in her own words.
@@donny1960 well, again, i did not say that Anne did not have any input into the changes, just that it’s unclear whose idea it was to do what and to what extent - so i’m using the word creators as a catch-all category, and naming people when pulling quotes
