Ep. 7 of Interview with the Vampire will kick you in the shins at Comic-Con 

When Louis said that Armand is the love of his life, I literally yelled, "That man murdered your child!" I can't wait to see how the show explains that change.

"the books will always be right here" is the most important thing to remember when watching any adaptation. They can't ruin your memories unless you let them. ETA I am totally on board for this version, faithful or not. It gay, it's bloody, it's compelling.

An argentinian friend told me that in the period when Lestat mentions about going to Buenos Aires, this city was pretty much like Paris, so I think it makes a lot of sense that he talks about going there

I think the whole point of season one and the big reveal from Rasheed is supposed to show that Louis was never telling a true to his own experience story as I suspect Armand has altered his memories and thoughts. That’s how I took the first season anyway 🤷🏻‍♂️

PSA: it is possible to like the books and the show. I have read the books and thinking about re-reading them. But I love this show and I love the entire cast!

I feel like that last scene was Loius deluding himself. Him and Armand are codependent and it's easy to see how that may look to him as true love.

Ok girl. I need to say a few things. One, I watched every single one of these, so obviously I've enjoyed them and found value in them. THAT BEING SAID, I'm more than a little miffed at the "serious fans don't like this show" comment. I've been a fan for over thirty years. I've grown up with these books. Anne Rice is a major figure in my life; she has informed my views on art, culture, music, books. I spent a big portion of the early 2000's DEEP in the wacky fandom. My husband recently asked me how many times have I read IWtV and TVL, and I honestly couldn't answer, it's that many times. I love the show. I did notice some of the continuity errors, like Louis' birthday, and those are things I will hope they fix in the next season. I hope they get better about that, because if they want recognition from mainstream awards, as a queer black goth show, they have to be *impecable.* and they weren't. BUT I did think they got the essence of the characters. I felt Lestat. Haven't you seen the fandom memes that Sam Reid is possessed by Lestat? How can so many people feel that way if he isn't getting the essence of the character? Louis was LOUIS. Claudia.... I will agree that Claudia was completely different, but aging her up the way the did would automatically change the character significantly. I thought New Orleans was exactly the way it's described by Louis in the book. I can't wait to see more Armand (I called it right off the bat, too). If they had changed the names of the characters, the title, and all other relevant detail and put it out there as something else, we would all be screaming about how they were ripping off Interview and Anne.

Spirit means essence, I think the show definitely has the essence. It’s a fresh, modern reimagining of a 50 year old story. Can’t wait for season 2.

Armand saying he always protects Louis from himself was a red flag!

I think that it is interesting, really, that the season decided to drop the Armand reveal almost exclusively for the book readers because based on what we know of Armand and his capacity for doing whatever it is that he likes doing, I am thoroughly enjoying the wildest and most utterly unhinged theories out there coming from piecing together the scantest of evidence (from Louis loving books and the bookshelves being only accessible by a flying vampire which means Armand dictates what Louis reads) to Louis' personality changes from the cold, reserved distant one during most of the interview, and the panicked one whenever Daniel points out the inconsistencies (the rain, and then later Lestat), to things being present in the bowl of blood beings served to Louis to Armand psyching Louis somehow by offering his own blood (or the bowl of blood basically being Armand's blood), and so so so many more. It is going to be a mad wait until season 2, but what makes me happier is that I have managed to indoctrinate at least 3 more people to read the Chronicles and ultimately, that is what matters the most.

Perhaps I'm overthinking, but I seriously doubt either of the vampires in the room would trust the general public with accurate information on how to kill a vampire... So I fully believe he lied there.

I understand the frustration of some books fans, but as an outsider I loved what I watched, I think there are some problems but overall I'm satisfied with the result, the trajectory of louis during the episodes, the idea of ​​his false emotional freedom nowadays, the concept in general got me invested!

I remember the show being advertised as being not the book or the movie but creating its own third thing and from the first episode I felt like it thoroughly established itself to tell the story in a new way. To me the framing of the interview and Louis unreliability as a narrator is built into the story with Daniel being a stand in for the audience calling out Louis on his inconsistencies and how he is retelling the story entirely different from the first time, the unreliability isn't a bug of the storytelling it's a feature.

I personally think that Louis is still the same person as in the books. He’s still depressed and brooding, it’s just because of Armond that he can put on this facade of confidence and swagger. In reality he’s so sad about everything that has happened, and his life is still falling apart. He’s only been able to not crack his shell when previous contradictions came up because they didn’t hit him as hard. If you remember he said that he can read the moments where he failed her, I think that is the moment or one of them that he was talking about. I think Armond cut those pages out “for Louis’s sake” and has essentially just filled the hole of Lestat. He sits in the chair as an older partner, who wears the pants in the relationship. He is someone Louis can cling to like he did Lestat, and someone who can direct him as needed. He still needs someone to take care of him and he’s found his replacement in Armond.

To me, I though that one of the main themes of the show is that memory is unreliable and ephemeral, and that there is no such thing as a true, definite version of events. All we can ever have are unreliable memories and points of view. I doubt that Louis is deliberately lying, but he is biased just as he was in the 1970's, and his memory focuses on things that he found important. As for Armand, my theory would be that he wanted to be able to read Daniel's thoughts without the filter of Daniel knowing that he could do that. Possibly out of caution that Daniel might want to harm them, possibly just to ensure that he keeps his part of the bargain. Season 2 will probably explain more.

Thank you so much for doing these breakdowns for each episode. You have been so wonderful and I cant wait to hear your input on Part II. I've been thinking about the show since Sunday and I think I've figured out what they are trying to do. Let me just say that Episode 7 was my favorite of the season and primarily because there is so much symbolism in the imagery. We see Lestat and Louis dressed in all white dancing and kissing in a room full of people like it's their wedding night. Contrast that with Louis and Armand in the final shot with Armand standing a step above Louis showing they are not equal, both dressed in all black (as they have all season) as if in mourning. Here's the interesting thing Louis outside of this 2nd interview typically always wears a lot of color even when we see him in the 70's with Daniel he's wearing light blue and side note his nails are filed in that scene to hide them. I think Armand is definitely using a combination of the Mind and Spell gift on Louis but I have two thought's on the reasoning. So in the 1st Interview Armand stopped Louis from killing Daniel but we know Louis typically attacks Daniel for asking to be made a vampire, but if you remember Louis said that Daniel asked that question when they we're talking about Claudia's 2nd attempt at leaving the family. That doesn't make sense that Louis would snap at that point. I think that Daniel actually broke Armand's spell on Louis memory then which caused him to remember truths about Claudia's death. Louis in the present almost seems to mimic Armand in many ways, they dress the same, they talk the same and there's a is power imbalance. Louis didn't like Lestat withholding information but Louis who loves to read can't access his own Library without Armand using the cloud gift. So yes, Armand definitely has a high level of control over Louis but I'm trying figure out if he's being imprisoned as Louis has called his home a coffin or if Armand feels responsible for his mental/emotional decline and trying to keep him from self-harm. One last thing about the timeline. I think I understand why they've made two interviews. So I noticed during the Daniel Flashback that Louis bank car said issued in 73 but valid until 74. I don't know why that time is so short but the important part is that the interview is still around the same time as the book says. I think Lestat did awake in the 80's from the sound of Rock Music but without the book as a catalyst to become a Star. That may piss fans off because it's very similar to how the QOD movie started but IDK. I do however think it's important that we see TVL and QOD event's happen in the mid to late 80's because there's a 30 years or so gap between that time period and Prince Lestat which would be the present. I do think Louis and Lestat were reunited in that decade but something tells me by the end Armand got a hold of Louis again, like I said Louis personality is very different from when we see him in IWTV and when he first met Daniel. I think Fareed definitely is a nod to the PL period and I think he hides his vampire nails like Louis did and eyes like Armand. I'm assuming this 2nd interview is a prelude to Prince Lestat meant to twist in the event's of IWTV. If that's true that means Lestat is in self imposed exile right now and wouldn't know what's going on with Louis and Armand. That's all my thought so far please poke holes, rip it to shreds, I just had to get this all out. 😂😂😂

Personally, I think the series did EXACTLY what it needed to do... REVAMP the public interest in THE BOOKS. I LOVE the series for what it is and I know I'm not the ONLY viewer who wants to reread and BUY what I haven't' read. Love finding your channel! xoxo

That hand grab by Armand at the end seemed overly quick and forced and Louis’ proclamation of “the love of my life” seemed very strained. I think Louis is up to something. If not brainwashed or gaslit, he is definitely looking for an “out” in his relationship with Armand. As for Louis having drugs at his apartment in the 70s, I got the sense that Louis (and Armand) had been spying on Daniel for awhile before their meeting in the bar. In that scene, you’ll see Louis enters the bar soon after Daniel. He knows that Daniel is a writer…and a drug user. Of course, he read Daniel’s mind, but I felt he knew this before approaching him and already had the drugs at his home, knowing this would be the lure.

Are we forgetting the odyssey of recollection conversation from episode 3? Is that not show canon? Isn’t it literally Daniel finding holes in Louis’ story? Doesn’t Louis say something to the tune of allow me to romanticize my story? I have always thought (especially after that scene) he is an unreliable narrator. Just like I don’t believe we need scenes of racism every episode to know it still bothers the black characters. Racism a lot of times is an annoying thing in the background of life that doesn’t need to be highlighted in our every thoughts and experiences. So I completely understand after Louis is no longer dealing in human affairs he stops talking about it. It’s clear from the scene in the bus this episode and Claudia in the train, they still experience racism even as vampires. I get the surprise the cop or Anderson didn’t throw out a slur on top of the homophobia. But I gotta say for me it wasn’t missed. Since racism is as common as homophobia at that time, I don’t really need the show to constantly remind me they usually coexist in the thoughts of bigots.

The finale was great. I have so many questions about Armand. Did anyone notice Louis face when he said Here’s Armand the love of my life ? It didn’t sound convincing lol Louis likes to read but Armand has the books high up where he can’t reach them. Armand’s comments were also creepy. I care more about him then does himself. I protect him from himself hmmm 🧐I can’t wait see what unfolds in season 2

Honestly...I'm loving this show. I love the changes, eventhouhg I thought I would hate them. And I hope that they let Lestat keep being a bastard, the latest books just portray him as great and good...and, in my opinion, Lestat lost a lot of personality because of it.

🤷🏾 I personally loved the series. The books and movies are still there for people that adore them. Jacob, Sam, and Bailey's version is the visuals and entertainment I need in 2022 and beyond.🌹🏆

You blew through the fact that on the phone Armand mentions something about “when will it arrive?” What going to arrive? A coffin?

If this show was to be faithful and true to the book then it never would be made. Books are able to go into great detail because it's on paper - movies and tv has to go through so much more scrutiny and at the end it boils down to budgets, money and time. That said - I really enjoyed this adaptation, acting and writing production. And I was mainly here for the story not the - picky picky it apart...

I actually think (and hope) Devil's Minion DID happen in 70s/80s and Armand just wiped himself from Daniel's memories and that's why, not the drugs, he doesn't remember him. Daniel could have entire months/years of fuzzy memories and blame that on his addiction, when it was actually Armand that made him forget. Maybe the murder gremlin decided to do one good thing and put Daniel's ass in rehab when he saw how destructive their reletionship was. Or maybe it was Louis who made him leave Daniel, coz tbh in that last shot neither Louis nor Armand look particualry happy and in love. As for the unreliable narrator, I think that Armand over the years may have manipulated Louis' memories at least a bit, Not to the point that what happened in a show didn't happen, but that Lestat came off more unhinged than he was

Sits over here in my weirdo corner, loving both the books and the show.👉🏽👈🏽 Even though there are changes in characterization, they still FEEL like the characters in the books. I’ve been rereading iwtv and Lestat WAS that terrible, if less abusive, but Louis certainly doesn’t describe him warmly or fondly. I feel like we’re viewing the show with the rose-tinted glasses of hindsight of the rest of the series. Sam is playing pretty much every variation of Lestat, it’s just he’s playing them all at the same time, which is jarring for those of us familiar with how Lestat changes in each book. Maybe the show is fundamentally different when it comes to specific lore and some character details, but it still FEELS like Anne Rice, especially when actual parts of the text are used. Idk I just feel a lot less negativity about it as an adaptation than I do about say Amazon’s Rings of Power. It’s making huge changes and taking risks, but I think the writers understand the source material. They’re just playing with that source material to keep even diehard book fans on our toes. I’m very excited to see where this series goes in future seasons.🤷🏽‍♀️

Am I the only one who's hoping that Sam Reid does an audiobook recording of The Vampire Lestat?

Lestat and Louis were not sitting separately in the street car because of the issues in their relationship -- Louis and Claudia were in the back because they are black and Lestat (and Antionette) was in the front a few rows up in the whites-only section.

I think therein lies my take on the show. I heard and saw Anne Rice and her son talk about getting the rights back and whatever info they had I went with. I honestly didnt watch any kind of interview with the showrunners and skipped from trailer to trailer until the show premiered. I dont expect any kind of adaptation to follow it's source material to the T because we've seen the results with other works so keeping my palette from being beriddled with expectations. That being said, I find that if the rules of vampirism are revealed on the by, its much better in thelong run. We shouldnt expect all the nuances to present themselves in the first season, because Anne Rice herself added or revised them as she went along. For example the differing accounts of seeing spirits, which wasnt a thing until it was. I for one, am hopeful for Akasha, The First brood. Even though they may not appear as "the books". Like Shakespeare, not every take is going to be the same.

I think Louis is smug at the end b/c Daniel had just accused him of being so messed up over Lestat he’d misremembered a key detail about Lestat’s killing (that both Louis and Claudia didn’t want to burn him). Louis had a mental break, where he remembered that he and he alone had spared Lestat, then Armand intervened. And Louis pointed to his totally wonderful, healthy, not-problematic-at-all relationship with Armand as a sort of proof (both to Daniel and to himself) that he was not still a mess over Lestat. That he had moved on. I think we as viewers are supposed to doubt that he has. :)

I love this show. My hubby watch me when I heard when Lestat whispered the word "Those Who Must Be Kept." when my mouth drop. My hubby is like what does that mean? I had to tell them about 'Those Who Must Be Kept.' and how they became a vampire. I am looking forward to the second season. I can't wait to see what happend with the book adaption of the rest of the Chronicles. I am looking forward to Memnoch The Devil my favorite book in The Chronicles.

I'm gay and I can confirm that we do in fact...have butts. I laughed out loud at that. I'll miss these videos. Can't wait til season 2.

In my opinion, I LOVED this show... I have a special place in my heart for TV shows/ Movies made from Books. I always find it fascinating what parts are chosen to be put on film, which parts are left out, and how the story is generally "re-imagined". Just to give context... in my BEST adaptation TOP 3 is "Green Mile". The book was written by Steven King and famously acted by Tom Hanks and Michael Clarke Duncan. That movie is amazing and was nominated for SEVERAL awards, including the Oscars and the Golden Globes. What I enjoyed about it, is it REALLY made an effort to follow the book. Almost exclusively. In some cases word for word. It was like watching the movie in my imagination come to life on the screen for everyone to see. On the flip side, in my WORST adaptation TOP 3 is "Battlefield Earth" The book's were written by L. Ron Hubbard and the movie starred John Travolta and Forest Whitaker. It was actually a trilogy of books that I read and really enjoyed very much. The BOOKS were very good, IMO. But the movie SUCKED. It was awful. It won several Razzie Awards for being so bad. According to Rotten Tomatoes, " Ugly, campy, and poorly acted, Battlefield Earth is a stunningly misguided, aggressively bad sci-fi folly." That being said... I AM, and have been for years, a HUGE Anne Rice fan. Love the Vampire Chronicles books, and have loved them for decades. So, I was very excited when I found out that the books were being "re-imagined" for television. I saw the movie in 1994 and was NOT impressed. It was "ho-hum", and kinda mediocre as a whole. Brad Pitt as Louis was amazing, but Tom Cruise as Lestat was just awful. I was disappointed in the whole thing. I SOO wanted this to be a good adaptation of the books. I think it failed, as far as a TRUE ADAPTATION of the books goes..... That being said, I liked the show. Really I did. Sam Reid as Lestat is just amazing!!! I can't take my eyes off him whenever he's on the screen. I don't know if I'm the only one who noticed, but he looks SO MUCH like Brad Pitt (the young version from the movie) at times, it's uncanny. And Jacob Anderson as Louis... wow.... the way he has to switch gears between characters in the space of SEVEN EPISODES..... starting out as the pimp businessman in Ep. 1, to the 2022 modern, calm, cool, collected version when he's talking to Malloy, back to the version he was with Lestat, to the father-figure to Claudia... that a HUGE reach of acting for one actor to do in only one season of television..... I LIKED the show.. really I did. I thoroughly enjoyed both the male leads. I just think if it was its OWN show, a stand-alone thing that was NOT attached to the books, it would have been so much better. I think it would have been better embraced by audiences. But I think it wants to take the books in directions they were never meant to go. I think the books are kinda anchoring the show down, and limiting it in some ways. I think the Show Runner and writers need to pick a lane..... If this show is going to be TRUE to the books, then it needs to make a greater effort to be TRUE to the books. If it's going to be its own thing, a vampire romance, showcasing the social dynamic between these monsters, a new "re-imagining". it needs to be THAT. But stop hopping back and forth, stop promising us Anne Rice and not delivering. Stop showing us elements of the "new" ( like the new psychic powers and sunlight/no sunlight thing) and not fully explaining it. Just My Opinion

44:38 I WHOLEHEARTEDLY believe that Louis only slit Lestat’s throat to purge him of the poisoned blood. It’s the same reason he sent him to the landfill- he knew exactly what he was doing. He was trying to keep Lestat alive ;)

I think all the hate is very undeserving. It's BASED off of the books it doesn't have to follow it exactly to be good

I presumed, honestly, that it wasn't so much that Lestat _couldn't_ drink the blood-cancer as it was just that he didn't *_like_* how the cancer tasted, or maybe because it wasn't just any old cancer but specifically a cancer of the blood itself[ rather than say a cancer of the brain or something]. I mean, he didn't seem ill to me after that, just mentally disturbed by the metaphorical walls closing in around them. Maybe as much because he's more desperate than ever to keep their family together, and yet also more convinced than ever before that their family is not actually particularly together at all anymore and may never again ever be, as because of the city[/cityfolk] all around them inevitably beginning to turn on them?. I dunno. It's another one of those moments where, nothing is actually outright said, so it's left entirely up to the viewer to surmise or imagine exactly what is and isn't going on entirely for themself. (The expected drawbacks perhaps of a visual medium, versus a written one, I suppose! 😁)

I feel as if the operative word, here, is that they swore that it kept true to the _'spirit'_ of Anne Rice's work. But different people are inevitably going feel very very differently about what exactly the 'spirit' of a thing actually is or isn't, sometimes. And many book readers are[ even more than they often consciously realize] typically looking not just for the 'spirit' but for as direct a translation as possible. I mean..... It could be said that the phrases 'F--- you!' and 'Go, take a hike!' may both have the same general "spirit" as each other-but of course they're each going to land pretty differently with different sorts of people. 🙂

Rolin Jones is the one who said Louis has been telling us a story that's been told to him. So anything is suspect. Especially ep 5 after the mirror crack

Hmmm I never heard the creators say this version would be more "true." What I gathered from these interviews is that they had more material to play it and more references to draw from. The movie premiered before Anne had written many of the books so Rolin and his team had the advantage of drawing from more sources and references than the 1994 film. And they do do that and they do it effectively well. Absolutely love this show and cannot wait for season 2.

I think it can be almost guaranteed that, even without the promise of keeping true to the 'spirit' of the original, there would still have been just about the same exact controversy-I feel like the history of adaptations, especially just within the last 20yrs or so has shown that, as even when faithfulness is not outright promised there will always be those who think that it either should have been or else have been simply left alone[ &/or something wholly original created instead-even though, even when there is something original, there is pretty much always the same kind of controversy over whether or not something is actually original "enough" or in fact too "derivative" of other things that came before it]. I feel like I have witnessed that happen countless times before, at this point. Just like I feel I have witnessed people go to splinters, countless times before, over whether or not everyone actually even agrees or not that something does or doesn't in fact either keep-to or deliver upon the promise of keeping the 'spirit'[ or etc.] of the original thing too. I feel like pretty much the only thing you can ever really be certain of in this life, aside from maybe death itself, is that some person[ or persons] or another are simply going to not-agree about...just about anything out there that there ever is.😅😅 🙃😁 Lol ((But please don't take this as me trying to belittle or dismiss your point here or anything, that is not my intention, at all; I'm just saying ....sometimes it feels kind of dauntingly inevitable, to think about too many different people talking about any given thing, because of how much you can pretty much always guarantee that some people aren't going to see eye to eye about some things as well as that some of those who don't are almost assuredly going to handle it less than ideally ... so I feel like I basically just expect it, all the time. Like I don't say anything at all, or go into anyone else saying anything at all, without first just kind of bracing myself to be encountering that sooner or later. And sometimes I kinda do wonder if that actually adds or detracts from my ability to interact less than negatively with dissenting opinions, really.😅 🤔😅))

I think it's weird for Maven to say that we aren't going to see another side of this story when that is the very premise of "The Vampire Lestat": Lestat telling his side of the story. The story sets up that Louis is an unreliable narrator and directly questions the authenticity of what he's saying. This isn't to say that there will be a big reveal sometime in the future, but it is a feature of the show that we are meant to question Louis (especially with the reveal that he might be manipulated by Armand).

I’ve thoroughly enjoyed your reviews/ critique of the series. I 100% agree that Rices work is best enjoyed in its true form, the books will always be superior to any adaptation because the books have the great lady’s heart and soul leaping from their pages. I have enjoyed the series, I suppose in this day and age of franchises, it’s good to see Anne Rices universe being represented. For me, I’d say the series is inspired by the Chronicles but definitely people need to read the books to fully enjoy Rices “immortal universe”

I think the point of the reveal of Louis's unreliable narration in the finale is that we should question everything that didn't make sense previously. Rewatching episodes will show how often it's mentioned in the series. This show doesn't seem to be spoonfeeding the audience in a traditional way and I think more will be revealed as the series continues. They're playing the long game and may never reveal "the true story" instead ask the audience to question every perspective available to us and make up our own minds about who we trust and what the real story is. It's elevated strategy in writing that isn't worried about tying up loose ends before they decide to reveal it to us from a storytelling perspective. I think the reason for the second interview is to show that Louis is similar to the book character and hasn't changed much at all. So it's the same in the same way it's different.

As someone who made the Vampire Chronicles a major part of my personality as a teen, I think it's so weird how much book fans hate the show. I'm actually obsessed with it? I'm having a wild time? I'm not angry or upset about the changes or the differing interpretations of the characters and I love what the actors are doing. The books have always been very different in tone and substance from other adaptations. Consider all the handwringing that went into the 1994 Interview with the Vampire, with Rice censoring her own work in an attempt to make the text less "gay" (remember, they almost made Louis a woman to tap-dance around the homoeroticism). Is Queen of the Damned good(no)? Did Stuart Townsend make a great Lestat(no)? Is nu-metal THE perfect genre of rock music to convey Lestat's message (no)? To be perfectly honest, the Lestat MUSICAL is probably the most 1 to 1 adaptation of any of the books, and it still makes Armand a weirdly spunky comic relief character, completely at odds with the terrible, miserable little cemetery gremlin he is in the book. But also,.... I only ever really enjoyed the first three Vampire Chronicles. I could literally just take those three books as a trilogy and be happy I'd had the best and most satisfying story arc. After Queen of the Damned, my enjoyment of the characters and series depleted with every subsequent book of the chronicles. The plots got goofier. Chunks of lore were retconned in the silliest ways imaginable. The writing wildly vacillated in quality. The characters all sort of became parodies of themselves. So no, I'm not heartbroken about any of the changes in the series. I can't even say that someone should read *all* the books, because a number of them aren't very good, and I would never recommend them! As for the show, I love Sam Reid's version of Lestat and don't think it's "insulting" to the character, as so many book fans have been claiming. If some people love the books, awesome. The books exist. You can go and read them a dozen times like I did. But it's so weird to pretend that the books are faultless pieces of art wherein every story decision, every character arc, every book is a masterpiece written by an incomparable genius. If anything, pointing out the flaws in the AMC series makes the whole thing seem even more like a fraternal twin of Anne's book series. These things aren't perfect, but they're sure as hell fun.

🤔 I think she missed the obvious plot of the season. You can't trust the majority of what Louis says, especially when they show telling parts triggers an episode and Rashid/Armand intervenes.

As someone with only a pop culture osmosis knowledge of the series & prior movie as a whole coming into this show I really appreciate hearing and seeing how it's different. I'm not a usual horror fan but have really liked and resonated with the storytelling as well and have found the show very enjoyable while also getting why there are/could be some valid critique of how it differs. After seeing the episode the first time and hearing Armand say that he 'protects louis from himself' I definitely got a sense that this would be used to clean up a few inaccuracies from the season that needed to be smoothed over but perhaps that is also dangerous to think too much on or lean too much into. I do get some sense that perhaps Armand did influence some of the recollecting tho, maybe more so on the idea that Louis was much more affectionate and loving with Lestat but cut out mention of it so as to not be too demonstrative? And while you saw a smug expression I was more reminded of 'get out' in that he had nothing behind his eyes and maybe it's a bit of a smokescreen of happiness that Armand is helping facilitate. There's a sterility and precision that deeply contrasts the Louis we knew of the past/in series and he's in some way been led by one person or another his entire life as a vampire so that feels at pla too. It all feels slightly up in the air but as a non die hard fan I do have questions and hopes and curiosities as to what might change or happen to differ from the source still and how that might play out in the subsequent season/s.

Armand did something to him, i know Armand did weird things to Louis

First off, I want to say I’ve loved your episode reviews of the show and as someone who hasn’t read TVC (yet!) your perspective as a long time fan was so interesting! But, I really disagree with the idea that Louis hiding his love for Lestat at the end of the season was “minor” and doesn’t reflect on the rest of the season. I think lots of the criticism has been around Louis brushing past the happy times he’s had with Lestat and failing to admit or show his love. I also think we see the biggest shift in Lestat’s character come after Claudia joins them, as he becomes much more cruel than we saw in prior episodes. Daniel points out that Louis’ lie is to avoid admitting that he chose Lestat over Claudia, so where else might he have omitted his love for Lestat to smooth out the fractures in he and Claudia’s relationship? Knowing Armand is there, who is not only Louis’ lover but also seemingly controls his access to everything, makes it even more interesting as to why Louis may be purposefully omitting his love for an ex, or misremembering it based on years of he (or Armand) telling a different story. I also don’t think anything being revealed as “not true” means the audience has wasted their time - think about how much we learn about Louis’ current state of mind by seeing the two contrasting scenes with Claudia after they kill Lestat. The broad strokes of the scene are the same (Lestat is dead, they send him to the dump, they escape), but the details being filled in are completely different and paint a different picture, which when contrasted show us a new dimension to Louis’ psyche. I think with how explicitly this show and the showrunners have talked about the way memory shifts and changes over the years, and the way TVC play with different perspectives on the same events, it wouldn’t be shocking for later seasons to re-evaluate some of what we’ve already seen through a different lens, just like how TVL did to the original IWTV.

I have not read any of Anne Rice's books, watched previous film adaptations, or followed the development of this series, so I didn't have any expectations going in and I'm enjoying the show quite a bit. However, I can totally see how a fan would be disappointed, especially as the creators of the show promised it would closely stick to the source material when that is clearly not the case. We shall see what season 2 brings! :) Thank you making these reviews, I'm always so excited to see what your thoughts are after watching the newest episode.

"...however he is not feeling so friendly to Louis and Lestat now, after they ghosted him for seventeen years..." is frankly one of the best lines ever in the history of youtube videos. 😂

I almost think that the interview is Louis's Machiavellian plan... that he somehow is using Daniel to draw out the truth that Armand is responsible for Claudia's death. That it's an elaborate break-up performance. That Louis is throwing Lestat under the bus yet again, and forcing Armand into a degrading charade, all as a part of his plot, which is why he fought back against Malloy's insistence that he spared Lestat on purpose (by sending him to the dump). Maybe he took Lestat's lessons in secrets and subterfuge to heart... at least that's what I hope. Otherwise, I don't know what the hell is going on.

I honestly wish more book fans (of any book) could have your attitude about adaptations. Even if something fails as an adaptation, if the story they choose to tell is interesting I'm always FASCINATED by the choices they make. My theory is that, despite Louis's claims of being more honest this time, he probably isn't. They've made such a point this season of suggesting that Louis's memory is faulty that I'd be willing to bet that when Lestat eventually shows up in the modern day he'll tell his side of the story and reveal that Louis is either lying or his memories have been altered. (By Armand, perhaps?)

Tom was racist during the poker scene

After reading seeing the reviews, unlike other book fans...I think it still does capture the spirit of Anne's work and is way more faithful than the movie even with changes. So, in the end, I think the show runner's were faithful to their words and promises and I think fans took that and ran with it and felt like they'd be getting a book to book copy and not an adaptation. I'd also like to say, as a black person...Tom was never a friend. He said a lot of slick remarks, lots of comments and the way he looks at them and and mainly Louis. He was never cool and after finally got the chance to tell the negro what he thought about them. He talks to Louis the way he does now because it's obvious Louis doesn't have the same social standing as he did in the past. He's gone recluse but still has money to buy Tom an entire new ship. Tom is simply letting his feelings show.

It’s not working for YOU, and that’s ok. But it’s working. I think Louis got his birth date wrong to show case his detachment from his human life. It’s kind of like the racism part, when he first became a vampire he was adamant on keeping ties to his human life, which included the racism that humans practiced. but as he began to reject human life, and embrace vampirism, Louis seems to all but forget about racism. It no longer matters to him. I think in this case Louis practically “forgot” his own birthday. I do think that Louis is an unreliable narrator and I’ll stick with that haha. But even if he isn’t, can we acknowledge when Louis and lestat were in the back room and Claudia was sitting near the stairs in ep.5 we can hear lestat say “please stop. I’m trying not to hurt you, I’ve been holding back”. So from this we can see that lestat was holding back, and was even trying to stop the fight, but (even tho we can’t see it) Louis was still trying to fight lestat, which resulted in the nails in the throat and being dropped from the sky. So it’s not like lestat just attacked Louis without cause. I love the books, but I have to say I love this show just as much. and I wouldn’t say it’s accurate, but I will honestly say for me this show has more of the vibes of the books than the movies. the show really captures the curse of vampirism wheras for me the movie, especially the IWTV movie didn’t really give that imo. My only gripe with this show is that they made Louis an accomplice in lestats attempted murder. I’m also kind of upset that they got rid of Antoinette. Like I hate her character, but I liked the thought of Louis having another vampire companion. Lastly, I think Armand really is controlling Louis. That’s why whenever Louis starts freaking out Armand somehow always manages to calm him down almost immediately. I think he pretends to be human to trick Daniel, and I think him and Daniel did have a relationship but he can’t remember it because of something Armand did to him. Armand was way more toxic than lestat in the books so I would not put anything past him. Edit: also to add that Louis calls Daniel “our boy” when talking to Armand. We know that Armand met Daniel in the bar, we know that Armand saved daniels life from Louis later on. Yet somehow Daniel remembers being attacked by Louis during the first interview but don’t remember Armand saving his life? You’d think that would be something you would remember. Unless your memory is erased. Daniel expresses not being able to remember most of that night, if any of it at all. who would forget the details of a night where you meet a freaking vampire for the first time? No matter how much time passes no one would forget that. And unless they change the events in the show, then we know that Armand plays a major hand in Claudia’s death. Are we saying that Louis just gets over that fact and falls in love with his daughter/sisters murderer? Or would it make more sense that an ancient mentally deranged vampire with god like powers, would use said powers on Louis? Just like he did to Daniel and lestat in the books.

A friendly reminder, stake doesn't kill a vampire in the folklore because in the folklore the body of the vampire is just a meat puppet for a demon, the demon is puppeteering the corpse. So the stake through the hart is just so the demon cannot lift that body again, but the demon will find another body to take, you are not killing anything only sabotaging.

I actually didn't really feel like either Claudia or Louis seemed half as bothered about-nor motivated to leave specifically because of-the possibility of the cityfolk turning in them as Louis did. I kinda felt as if that just happened to coincide with Louis and Claudia wanting to leave to get away from Lestat in general, and so .. they just used that, as a cover, for their real escape plans. It may be possible that Lestat specifically had a bad experience before, in the past, with humans noticing something was not-right about the vampires next door? Or maybe it really is just catering to more modern sensibilities, or whatever, since modern audiences really do kind of tend to have this tendency these days to just scoff when they watch things at how deep human denial can be about even things right in front of them or how readily or willfully unobservant they like to tolerate seeing people be in fiction specifically because of just how observant they like to think either themselves or others would and wouldn't "believably" be, if certain things ever actually _were_ to occur in real-life?. Who knows. 🤔😅 🤷‍♀️ But I actually like that Louis isn't as totally passive in the tv series as he is in the books. I like that sometimes they aren't just saying, "what would happen if x-thing happened just a little differently"-sometimes they are actually saying "what would happen if x-thing about this character had been slightly different". I don't feel like those kinds of hypotheticals actually do betray the spirit of the original, even the do often cause things to happen in slightly different ways and/or for slightly different reasons. But, of course, I'm sure those things themselves may be more at the heart or core or foundation of what the spirit of the original was to some people than to others; and that's totally fair and understandable , too. ^-^ (But, just for example, 'what if Louis had been more active / less passive' .. or 'what if Louis hadn't been white' .. or 'what if Claudia had been a little older' .. or 'what if their relationships were founded on slightly less unhealthy premises, but were still just as dysfunctional in the end'.... that's kind of what I feel like the tv series is exploring, and I don't actually feel that - once you have accounted for those particular puzzle pieces - the spirit of the original story as it unfolds around those slight changes ISN'T in fact much more 'true' than it may initially seem[ .. I personally feel like it IS a lot more true than people might initially think]. Or maybe _I'm_ just as good at wilful-ignorance and rationalization to an extreme fault as humans in the VC books are.😅😅🙃👀😅🤣🤣🤣)

I see them taking elements from the Movie, as years later, Rice said there were changes the movie made that she actually liked.

I suddenly remember just how much I loved the fact that you couldn't just burn a Ricean vampire, you had to also scatter the ashes. 🤭🤭 (Like, that was one of my favoritest little details. ^-^) I think it could be fun, if we discover later on that certain methods of 'killing' a vampire don't technically work at all...and that others, do work, but it's more of an 'X-method' +[something-more] kind of thing. And we don't really know what tv series Louis actually has or hasn't personally experienced first-hand before, versus what Louis in the books would have, at any particular point or not. It's kinda like peeling layers off an onion, except..more fun. Lol 😆

As a fan of the original books and the movie, I really like the show. It's definitely different but I'm curious to see how the changes play out over a longer evolving story, largely because I think it provides potential growth arcs especially for character like Lestat who are just indulged in AR's work. I am sort of in the Armand mind control camp but less Armand has mind controlled the relationship into existence and more something shifted since 1972 and the present to explain where we are in 2022. So a relationship that started consenually and changed for some reason. If anything in Louis' story was a lie introduced by Armand, it's Lestat's total disregard for Claudia.

I have a theory about Louis's memory inconsistency since I think it'll be explored even further in season two. I think that, starting at the point of Claudia's hatred of Louis for not fully killing Lestat (I think, as Maven said, that everything before that point was accurate memory), we might be seeing much more of Louis's memory of the travels in Europe being called into question and I think there is a reason for it. Namely, starting with the Claudia lie, that there is a possibility that much of Louis's season two memories are being manipulated (via gaslighting or something similar rather than by mind control) by Armand, possibly to frame Armand in a favourable light in Louis' eyes. Don't get me wrong I don't think Louis was mistaken about Lestat, but I think it might be the case from the Claudia hating Louis thing onwards, given how cleanly the pages of Claudia's diary were removed in that scene compared to earlier with the entry about Bruce being violently torn out. If this is the case, I think that the climatic moment of season two will be Louis realizing Armand's lies about the flashback events of season two (which will probably paint Armand in a good light until that point) and Louis remembering what happened to Claudia at the Theatres des Vampires and Armand's role in it. This is just a small theory, let me know what you guys think of it.

I'm excited to learn more about the show's version of Armand and Louis' shared backstory. With all due respect, I disagree with your interpretation about Louis being smug about calling Armand (not Lestat) the real love of his life. His facial expression seemed very ambiguous to me. Maybe Armand is not mind-controlling Louis, but, if he is anything like his book counterpart, he has the strength, cunning, and personality to play on Louis' weaknesses and control him in other ways. His floating above Louis perhaps symbolizes that their relationship is not on even footing. Louis might feel pressured or obligated into calling Armand his one true love for whatever reason. My question right now is, what does Armand have on Louis?

At 50:40, I think you've missed something. Vampire apocalypse? I thought the only swarm of vampire attacks will come upon Louis? Armand even calls the book he's writing with Daniel his suicide letter? If that's the case, I think Daniel's response is correct. He is just there so Louis can have someone skilled enough to write his memoirs. If the book is published, no one will believe vampires are real. And the vampires will just kill Louis for revealing their secrets. Daniel even brings this up. He says he can't control how the public will interpret this book, & may just create a line of Claudia Halloween costumes, despite Louis's reassurance that Daniel will frame the narrative correctly.

The show works perfectly fine if you don't expect it to be the book or the movie. I'm so glad that I didn't even know about the show until I saw the trailer and had no idea that the showrunners had said they were going to be faithful to the books or the characters. I've enjoyed it so much more without caring about it being a devoted adaptation. I imagine that Those Who Must Be Kept need to be kept a secret because not all vamps are old enough to keep from bursting into flame, not to mention exposing the secret leaves them vulnerable to whoever wants to use them to gain power or control other vampires. How easy would it be to just kill the vamp keeping them and then just hold them hostage, drinking their blood to get stronger and stronger and threatening all the other vamps with dipping them in the sun and roasting their fledglings? There are only 7 episodes so I think the show gave more than enough mention to side plots without them overwhelming the story they were telling. Louis says he's giving the interview because of the plotting of the other vamps and that's really all we need to hear. They don't have to mention it over and over again. This is only 7 eps and it's part 1 of the book and the interview. The vampocalypse is not the story they're telling. (By the way, I'm pretty sure that Daniel thinks this is some bullshit fantasy on Louis's part and that's why he doesn't care about it. If he believed it was real, he'd be less concerned about inaccuracies in Louis' story and more about what they were up to. Knowing that Louis is actually a vampire would be enough to have him worried.) Louis was extremely upset because he lied about killing Lestat and he has perhaps convinced himself that Claudia didn't want to kill him either, not really, to mitigate his own guilt for choosing Lestat over Claudia. This version of Lestat wanted to kill Claudia before she tried to kill him so by letting him live, Louis was ultimately dooming Claudia to eventual death when Lestat found them. Sure things didn't play out like that, but the two of them had to think they would. Louis has already shown his utter reluctance to face the ways he failed Claudia and this was the ultimate failure. Or, Armand really did do a little mind mojo and give him a false memory of the way it played out because Louis was so upset about it. Or he gave him a false memory to convince him that he killed Lestat and therefore didn't really love him and Armand is the love of his life. The mind control thing is a natural assumption considering it's something Armand has done to Louis canonically and considering how much control he is exerting over Louis and the interview. He might act as Louis' servant but he seems to control everything around Louis, creating a lovely gilded cage for him. I don't personally think they will go heavy on the mind-altering, but if it is, the groundwork is actually there.

Did anyone else watch how Sam moved as Lestat? He glides up stairs and down to the floor with the Cancer guy.

I think that they kept to the spirit of the books - mainly don’t believe what Louis says and wait for someone else’s point of view. If he lied about one thing he could have lied about another and we will not have a conformation untill, idk, season 3 maybe? Considering that he is telling a story about his ex in the same room as his current lover… And I liked the mystery, I think it’s great that we have a chance to theorize! Show runners shouldn’t lay all the answers at once, I certainly didn’t expect them to.

I'm so glad I never read the books because i would have had to compare and I love this show sooooooo much. I'm never even going to read the books until this show is completely over coz i dont want to ruin my experience with it.

I think you can have multiple loves of your life. One after the other.

I do think Louis is telling the truth!! Or at least he thinks he is. His memories are deeeefinitely being manipulated by Armand and his mind gift. I think Louis genuinely believes what he’s recalling- but those memories are… not whole. Based in truth, but missing details. Specifically I theorize that Lestat DID indeed do many of the awful things he was shown to do… Minus the drop. That drop is WAYYYYY too similar to the flying drop Armand did to Lestat in their books. So I’m sceptical about it. However I believe the bulk of the manipulation is in taking away Louis’s positive memories of Lestat. Kinda- withholding them from him, the same way Armand is withholding books and nature. Not quite “mind control” like you said, but certainly… some tampering. The truth is there. But we’re missing pieces of the puzzle.

Hear me out for an s2 episode opening. Abducted Trent Reznor: Look. I don't know what I can do for you. Lestat: There was once a man that made me feel dangerously alive, dangerously fragile...

Excellent reviews, these last seven episodes. As entertaining as the show, itself!

Looks like Armand manipulates Louis memories...

“Louis hasn’t had direct racism towards him since becoming a vampire… since episode 3” sorry but you need to pay more attention..

I don't know what's going on but I am extremely happy with it. We got at least one reasonably faithful adaptation. And I own wayyyy too many versions of Phantom of the Opera or Dracula or Dangerous Liaisons (new one coming out this month!!!!!!) To be pedantic. I am ready for differences and changes at this point. Especially since it's been so many years since I've read any of the books. I didn't even remember how toxic Armand was until the doms lost in adaptation. For some reason I just keep remembering what Louis and Claudia did between Madeline's creation and Claudia's death... That absolutely nobody ever brings up the way that they will constantly laugh at the ending of part one of "It" the novel and how uncomfortable that is. Maybe because I was in late Middle School I somehow misinterpreted what I was reading? Marius does the same thing with Pandora later on, they just had a previous history that was more intimate than Louis and claudia. Tell me if I misremembering! please! I've seen the thought floating around that this version of Daniel may receive the David Talbot treatment. And I really sincerely hope not. I want and desperately need to see a proper David talbot. I think David was one of my favorite characters in all of the books. Granted I stopped reading after the vampire Pandora and the vampire Armand so I'm not sure what ultimately happened with him. But I loved him.

Your recaps of this season have been fascinating. I'd watch more episodes made up of the outtakes you cut for time and any further analysis you held back. There was so much going on in this show, even in the background with the props, sets and costumes. The stripped down, all white costumes for the finale killing spree were a call back to the family portrait on the back cover of the original paperback edition of Interview with the Vampire, where Claudia wears a frilly white dress and Lestat and Louis are dressed in white suits. I still have my cherished original copy and recognized the reference as soon as I saw Claudia's dress.

Louis said the whole point of this 2022 interview is "Truth & reconciliation" but said with I think a bit of an air of a 'shrug' and a strongly implied "...Maybe"[ or 'I don't rightly/entirely/ know'] about it. However, it is arguable whether or not 'truth' here does indeed mean literally getting all the facts exactly right, or if that actually means something else to Louis here. . . Like, I dunno, perhaps just some kind of personal and/or emotional 'truth' ? or something?? (I kinda feel as if that is actually exactly what Daniel and Louis were constantly butting heads, disputing about with each other so much throughout the entire first season honestly.😅 But maybe I just read weird things into stuff, myself? I have no idea! Lol)

I’m still not convinced that the cover model on the prince lestat book isn’t Sam Reid cuz my god he looks just like him from afar.

I have been a fan of the books for about 20ish years. I was nervous about the show when I first heard about it. Overall I enjoyed this first season. Definitely have my nit picks, but it has also been awhile since I have read the book. Curious what will change feom the book in season 2. My biggest concern before the show began was them aging up Claudia by so much and how that would change her story and ultimate fate. Despite some issues I had with season I did really enjoy it. I am always for there being more vampire media.

I liked the show and I'm definitely gonna watch Season 2. But I have to say, as a romance, it's been rather disappointing. It feels like first, they reviewed decades of literary analysis and criticism about Anne Rice's books. Based on that, they removed everything problematic about Louis's and Lestat's relationship. Then, they hired a sensitivity writer and addressed the mixed-race romance aspect as best as they were capable. And then, they decided that to warrant the murder attempt in Ep. 7, they need Lestat to do something very dramatic in Ep. 5, so they threw in domestic abuse + rape threats. Jesus. Also, the pilot seemed promising, but the time skips and the sparsity of (physical, verbal, mutual) intimacy really damaged Louis's and Lestat's chemistry to me. But then again, maybe we'll see some real OTP chemistry between Louis and Armand in Season 2? I swear to gods, though, if they introduce Armand as the wholesome boyfriend option and then have Lestat the toxic bad boy return and win Louis, I'm gonna barf.

About the twins at the party, initially I thought it was supposed to be a nod to the serial killer vampire twin carter brothers that would’ve been active sort of around this time in New Orleans but they were the Carter brothers and nothing was brought of it.

The show is amazing! This video spends more time picking at the differences on how it's not like the books enough (and I say this as someone who has read the books), and ignores the clear indicators and thematic elements that the show DOES address and shed light on. I love the first three books, the rest of them were trash to be honest. Also, this video points out how the lore in the books is different from the vampire lore in the show - that had me cracking up, b/c Anne Rice changed the lore of the vampires like four or five times to the point that "cannon" is difficult to exist b/c she kept changes things at whim. The comment that Daniel doesn't have a sympathetic bone in his body, honestly that fact that Daniel is pushing Luis to be more honest, to face what really happened, to STOP editorializing is intriguing.

The show gave me what I needed from it. I didn't want a perfect adaptation of the book; it's the most boring in the series and so much of it got retconned later. If I want to know what happened in the book, I can just re-read it. I WAS pleasantly surprised to see how much of Lestat's story (the one we're really all here to see, let's be real) remained accurate to The Vampire Lestat. I know some stuff will change, but I cannot WAIT for that Wolfkiller scene.

I’ve seen numerous takes from many fans of the show and books that are on the extremes of both ends of the spectrum but I will say at the end of watching this I will say your take is somewhat fair. Although I do disagree with quite a few things that were said. As newer fan of Anne’s books I can understand how fans more familiar with her work would feel slighted about the show making changes that they don’t agree with. However I think because I haven’t been with the source material as long it makes me appreciate the show more. Especially because it’s made me start reading the novels. I do think the comment of “it’s not working” seems a bit much since this was only one season and trying to condense several books worth of story in the last episode is a little unfair and unrealistic. I do agree that there may be some inconsistencies story line wise. Maybe they’re intentional? Maybe not clear narrative direction? Who knows. I will say despite your critique I was glad to hear you would at least continue to watch for the second season. Hopefully it improves in the areas you weren’t satisfied with but as for me, for this show I think Jacob, Sam, Bailey, and Eric were meant to play these characters and bring so much to this version of Anne’s universe. Sidenote: hardcore fans of the books, please relax, we get it😅😂

I’ve been a fan of the books for a decade but I still enjoyed the series. It’s not as good as the original but it was fun to watch and I can’t wait for season two! It’d be interesting / fun if you did a deep dive of every book in the series as well! 🙌🏻

As someone who has only seen the film adaptation years before I watched the show, I must say I enjoyed this show and it made me want to read the book just to see how different it was, and I’m enjoying the book just as much if not more.

Thank you 🙏 to you and your team for walking us through all 7 episodes. Truly a joy watching you and learning about the parts I missed! 🎉

I think the most disappointing aspect by far is Lestat’s DV towards Claudia. He adored her.

While I do understand and also have some similar issues around this adaptation, I don't think that necessarily justifies some of the blowback I've seen from youtubers and fans alike. Just because something isn't what you want it to be, doesn't entitle anyone to rage and spew obscenities at the cast and crew involved in this series. I've seen a lot of that online. I've also seen a lot of people loving the show. The series is an adaptation. The network and filmmakers are allowed to do what they want with an intellectual property, they spent millions to aquire. I love Anne's novels, but we've seen and enjoyed those stories for decades. This is something different, and that's ok. I get youtubers like the maven have an occupation and an income they need and they have to make content that will attract viewers and followers, but at some point we should be intellectually honest and not act as if these filmmakers have created some sort of horrific abomination that's destroyed Anne's legacy. That's just not accurate, and does nothing but further create an already divided fandom.

I’m near certain Armand is using his mind gift on Louis, and manipulating his memory. What he can and can’t remember about Lestat, specifically. What his intentions are? Now that’s my question. Is it a matter of “I want you to hate Lestat like I do, so you come running to me instead. See how much he hurt you? I’m the only one who won’t do that to you- stay with me!” Or “I know how much you loved Lestat, but he’s gone now. If you remember him as a bad person, the loss will be less devastating. I don’t want you to live your life broken by guilt. I’m protecting you from your emotions because I care for you”. In the books, Armand is shown to feel genuine love (EVEN FOR HUMANS!!)… but it’s naive and childlike. He’s like a little kid who traps a beautiful butterfly in a jar, to admire it forever. But when it begins to wither and die, he doesn’t understand or learn from it. Even if his love is genuine, the way he shows it is inherently toxic. Which is why I really hope they don’t go “shallow antagonist” with him.

I'm not going to lie, I like that version of " Interview with the vampire " quite a lot because the show keeps me on my toes even if I've read the books.

If starvation kills vampires, how are any of them still alive? Akasha was starved for milennia so if that were true, all of them would be dead.

The show is amazing and I love it .Sam Reid and Jacob Anderson brings new life into the story . I love the takes that have on Louis and Lestat. I would like more seasons with them. I want to know more about Armand and Daniel. if Daniel in the 70s and '80s had a relationship with Armand. then afterwards did Armand mind wipe him to forget. . I will hold off from Reading any of the books. Some of the book fans of this Book Series has turned me completely OFF . I don't want to get infected with the type of mental gymnastics that's afflicted them. Aside of that to other book fans thank you. Thanks for answering questions and for not being insufferable to new fans . you are very much appreciated . I love talking to you guys and getting your insights .

We are all entitled to our opinions but when you say most of the deep fandom hates this show it is very hurtful. I’ve considered myself a part of this fandom my whole life and most of my friends as well and we all love this show. I dunno that just wasn’t called for.

While watching this show, I have vacillated between wanting to kick the man in the shins and reconsidering. There are definitely these wonderful, beautiful moments in the show that I really enjoy and give a sense of full separation from source material and series that are positive. There’s also been moments that I found downright reprehensible. You reminded me that AMC did purchase the rights to these work, I still feel it was done predatorily and with a aire of dishonest intent. However, it remains they did purchase the rights therefore do have the ability to do whatever they want with the Material. They’ve created this alternate universe where the world can go in absolutely any direction which I really appreciate. I’m excited that there are so many people talking about this franchise again, so many new people discovering these characters. I really do look forward to season 2, even if there were quite a few times I swore off even watching the next episode of this season.

When Lestat said that if he knows Italians they will soon be on Santorini with guns, I am pretty sure he meant they would attack Greece, wich they did in WW2 and lost. And he can make that guess because he has read history.

Louis is for sure an unreliable narrator, I can't wait to know Lestat's version of the same event. Most likely, the truth is somewhere in between both versions.

Hold on a second I’m a little confused on the killing vampires bit. If a vampire can reform from ashes that aren’t scattered but can also be killed by destroying the heart and brain isn’t that kind of a contradiction? I mean really burning a vampire down to ashes is doing exactly that destroying the heart and brain along with everything else?

While you're not wrong that people can always headcanon whatever they like beyond just what is written/presented, no matter what. But I just don't actually agree, personally, that we _do_ have to take everything at face-value as if it is totally reliable narration unless it is directly stated that isn't. Especially when I don't think that it has sufficiently been directly stated that it actually _IS_ reliable narration either. And when the original source material itself makes use of unreliable narration. And the story shown in the tv series is obviously incomplete or unfinished, even if they hadn't ever gotten that season 2 renewal. That doesn't mean that there aren't certain details that won't ever be retconned or recontextualized or such, nor does it mean that there might not be some inconsistencies or things that actually were just unintentional flubs[ or perhaps miscommunications somewhere between the scriptwriters and/or the props department and such] either. But also, I mean, would Lestat coming out in season three or so[ or in a new AMC Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles / Immortal Universe spin-off 'Vampire Lestat' tv series] and saying "ACTUALLY-ALL THESE DETAILS WERE COMPLETE LIES" _really_ be any more of a prick move for the tv series to pull than it was for the books? 🤔🙃😅🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️ (idk)🤣 I guess I just don't personally see 'trying to put as absolutely much as possible all into each one season'[ as if it might be the last or only season they ever get] as necessarily being the same thing as like literally trying to make each season absolutely totally stand on its own with zero things ever left open-ended and unanswered or unexplained and remaining to (ideally) be [hopefully ]explored in a future season? I mean, of course they don't know for sure if they will or won't get a next season, until they get that official renewal. But considering the whole 'Immortals Universe' moniker and the fact that they bought the rights to so many of Anne Rice's books-I find it difficult to believe that no one is, all at the same time, also planning ahead for the long-game just in case they *DO* actually get many more seasons still to come. I think, maybe, that just means they're trying not to take anything for granted and really trying to put their all into it each season as it comes along. Even though, sure, it may also mean that they are sometimes maybe just dogpiling as many little references or such into things even if they don't always have the time to fully flesh-out and realize every single one as much as they otherwise could too. But, personally, I actually felt like every time Daniel pushed back on something.... it _was_ actually something bigger and bigger. And I thought it made sense why he would stop pushing at every little inconsistency at certain points-such as right after Louis talked him into essentially just allowing Louis his inconsistency under the guise or claim of his "odyssey of memory" and just re-telling his story the way that he wanted to tell it now regardless of whatever his personal reasons for wanting to do so may or may not be, OR such as after Louis possibly just about gave him a brain aneurysm or a seizure or something that one time when Daniel's hand went totally and completely out of control possibly leaving Daniel reasonably afraid how much worse it could still get but trying not to show how intimidated he was by that-until something would eventually either be too big or certain things would just add up into too much for Daniel to help himself or continue holding back anymore and something would just bubble over gradually more and more beyond restraining every time. Until, finally, we reached this boiling point at the very end of episode 7; where this time, Daniel wouldn't just stop pushing or let it slide anymore, no matter if Louis might lash out at him for it again even worse than ever before Daniel finally put his foot down on something and refused to let up on it until in an act desperation to distract and derail and divert Daniel's prying yet again Rashid just breaks his cover and drops that big reveal bombshell and the credits roll. I feel as if that one thing being proven definitively inconsistent was actually[ very likely] confirming that Daniel was absolutely right to question exactly why Louis was even doing another interview now or not and to be so skeptical of the veracity and transparency of everything else at every corner before then too. And I feel like that leaves it completely open to questioning, maybe, even the things that Daniel _didn't_ overtly question. Plus, Daniel seems to have a TON of notes outside of just the interview recordings themselves involving various things which he wasn't openly asking about out loud yet for whatever reasons too, as we saw. So, while it is certainly possible that some inconsistencies may just be accidental flubs. I still think it's much too early yet to tell exactly what all is accidental, or was actually an intentionally placed hint or piece teasing in a larger puzzle, or not. Until the tv series' creators themselves say exactly what was or wasn't accidental[ or until we see exactly what they do and don't do with what things moving forward from here], I think it remains to be seen, and could possibly turn out to go either way. Like, maybe they were just flubs, or maybe they were actually more-and even if they weren't intentional & were just accidents, maybe they will become turned into more in the next season(s), or maybe they won't. And I don't really think that unreliable narration actually _does_ need to always directly expose itself-I mean, sometimes the 'maybe it could be, or maybe it isn't' ambiguity angle is every bit as a much an option as an undeniably clean-cut 'trust nothing, everything is a lie' or such; if that makes any sense. But maybe that's just me. Either way, I don't think season 2 can be finished or aired fast enough for me, after that finale! ^--^ 😅🤭🤭😊 And, either way, I still feel that..despite its differences...the tv series IS still recognizably The Vampire Chronicles / Interview With The Vampire .. And I actually really like that it embraces both the movie and the books as predecessors of fair regard before itself[ even if the books are still the o.g. canon source], and that it is kind of paying tribute to how Anne Rice herself also kinda loved enjoying &/or taking inspiration from movies and tv[ or how movies & tv have either directly or indirectly taken inspiration from Anne Rice] throughout the years and how she also came to appreciate even what the 1990s 'Interview' movie had done in its own rights too. (Like, Louis' glasses, after he becomes a vampire .. pretty sure that's an easter egg / nod to the 1990s Bram Stoker's "Dracula" movie. And the list goes on.) I like that it actually isn't just treating itself like an elitist or purist Ricean club, but more like a bridge between books and movie both or like an open door to Ricean enthusiasts and general vampire &/or monster-movie nerds alike, and more. ^-^ That actually makes my heart happy, personally, and also strangely reminds me how Anne Rice once said that she loved what True Blood did[ even though she'd written her own Ricean vampires so that she couldn't take it that far herself] and that her own Ricean vampires could afford to be merciful to Twilight vampires or whatever which some Twi!fans supposedly took as insulting but for some reason I personally took as her trying to be kind of sweet/gracious and subtly tell people to stop mean!meme-ing vampires and slayer from other franchises taking digs at off-ing Twi!vamps or such. 🤭 🤣🤣

Not me waiting for a red headed twink to be introduced as Armond and then it be revealed that Rashid is the vampire Armond! 🤦🏼‍♂️

I come from the point of view of someone who had two beloved book series adapted to TV with MASSIVE changes in the last year, one being The Vampire Chronicles and the other the Wheel of Times. I honestly think the Interview with the Vampire show came out way better quality wise (ok it came out later meaning it didnt have as many COVID related issues in productions but still). I'm starting to get used to seeing adaptions doing they own thing, accepting that different doesnt equal bad. Am I sad that we won't get a faithful adaption? Yes, absolutely. I will keep watching both series? Also yes, they're both independent from their source material, both evolving into a their own new thing, sisters not twins as they say. If anything, it's just more content for us fans to enjoy in a world that we love. The shows may be flawed, but so are the books. Can't wait to see what theyre planning for season 2.