[AMC] Interview with the Vampire (don't tell hepcat)

[ImLawBoy]

AMC has launched a new series for the now classic Anne Rice vampire novel Interview with the Vampire. It's taken some hits over the years for introducing us to emo vampires, but at the time it was a fresh take on vampires and vampire mythology that (as I argued in another recent thread) kept vampires as monsters, but also showed their lingering humanity. The prior movie version was probably most notable for the miscasting of Tom Cruise as alpha vampire Lestat and Brad Pitt as newbie vampire Louis (they should have traded roles!) and for the fantastic scenery chewing of Kirsten Dunst as a pre-teen vampire.

So, the new version started last night. There are some crucial changes, with time timeline shifted forward a bit. The modern parts are truly modern (i.e., current day with pandemic considerations and the like), and the initial meeting of Louis and Lestat occurs in the early 1900s (still in New Orleans). Louis is now Black (played by Jacob Anderson, aka Grey Worm from Game of Thrones) and runs brothels in New Orleans. His family is well to do, but clearly second class citizens to the whites of the time. Current-day Louis is recounting his tale for a second time to journalist Daniel Molloy (a perfectly cast Eric Bogosian) in Louis' Dubai penthouse. The first telling was in the 1970s in San Francisco, and Molloy never did anything with the tapes from the day because they were too fantastical and contradictory, and Molloy was too drugged up.

Anyway, the first episode was interesting. As one thing I read about it said, it replaces the subtext with actual text regarding the relationship between Louis and Lestat (Sam Reid). Some of Lestat's powers are a bit sketchy, but when he's a monster he's truly monstrous. They knocked it out of the park by getting Bogosian to play the journalist - he adds some much needed gravitas to the retelling. It's already been renewed for a season 2 (and AMC is also creating a series based on Rice's Mayfair Witches book series, so they're going all-in on her stuff), but I don't know how much of the original book they're telling in season 1 or if they're moving on to The Vampire Lestat for season 2.

[El Guapo]

Why are we not telling hepcat? Is he upset that none of the Golden Girls were cast? Or that this doesn't feature incest?

[ImLawBoy]

He was slagging on Interview with the Vampire in another thread, so I'm just being goofy and pretending I don't want him to know I'm watching emo vampires.

[Smoove_B]

I discovered the books long after the movies came out (I think I was in college, experimenting, as one does) and read them a year or so after seeing the movie. Maybe it was a few years; everything is fuzzy now. Anyway, I really liked the first two books - like, couldn't put them down they were so good.

I was curious to see how this show was received. I didn't trust it would be good, but I am watching and will endeavor to see it if reviews are positive. I understand opinions on Rice and the whole vampire movement of the 80s and 90s are mixed, but I do think those first two books were fantastic.

[hepcat]

He was slagging on Interview with the Vampire in another thread, so I'm just being goofy and pretending I don't want him to know I'm watching emo vampires.

I did initially go after Rice, but you (rightfully) insinuated that my true target should be the numerous copycats that came after her and turned what should have been monsters into a legion of Fabios sweeping housewives off their feet.

Why are we not telling hepcat? Is he upset that none of the Golden Girls were cast? Or that this doesn't feature incest?

Listen pal, name one goddamn thing Bea Arthur couldn't make better. Here, I'll save you the time.



That's a stone cold fact. And your fancy lawyering degree can't deny it. No matter how much habeas corpsering and Ex Parteying you throw at it.

As for incest, I'm quite sure that if George "Sis, you lose weight?" Martin was part of Rice's Stratford-on-Oedipus group, we'd have nothing but sibling on sibling action from page 1 to page 937.

[YellowKing]

The first two books might be my favorite two vampire novels of all time (yes, beating the original Dracula), with Vampire Lestat being better than Interview. Really looking forward to this.

And yes, I agree the only good thing about the original movie was Kirsten Dunst.

I never really thought of Rice's vampires as "emo." She doubled down on the eroticism of the original Dracula and brought to the forefront the agony of eternal life, but to me they never felt like brooding teenagers. More like bored and arrogant nobility constantly looking for ways to distract themselves from the knowledge of their curse.

[ImLawBoy]

Don't let my squawking about emo vampires fool you. I'm a big fan of the first few books including Queen of the Damned, even if it falls short of the first two. I even liked Tale of the Body Thief in her Vampire Chronicles, but I lost interest as the series went on. I wouldn't personally put them ahead of Dracula or even Salem's Lot, but I don't think they're outside the discussion.

[Kraken]

I wasn't too interested in this series until the Boston Globe reviewer raved about it. He said reviewers were given the first five episodes; he binged them all and can't wait for the last two. We just re-watched the movie last week. It was better than I remembered.

Looking forward to starting the series tonight.

[rittchard]

I was really leery of this when I heard about it and saw the initial previews. I didn't recognize any of the cast members at first so I was a little annoyed they didn't find some bigger names/talent that could be counted on. But then I started watching, and after about 10 minutes of grumbling, they started to win me over. Of course it helped that I finally realized Louis was Grey Worm, which of course immediately made me much happier. I wasn't impressed with the initial Lestat, I thought he was attractive but not refined enough in the way that I imagined he should be. But a couple scenes later they changed his hair or something and I changed my mind. Pretty soon I was hooked and commenting on how they seemed to be willing to embrace the homoerotic undertones much better than I remember the old movie did. And then I noticed the two leads had some definite chemistry. And then...

Spoiler:

BOING!!!! HOLY GAY SEX SCENE BATMAN!!!!! Excuse me for saying it but that is one beautiful man ass. I honestly had no idea they were going there with this show but wow.

Anyway, I was very impressed overall with ep 1. Very well done and I can't wait to see the addition of the little girl.

[hepcat]

Started watching it last night and then promptly stopped when they introduced sodomy and feces in a brothel as I was eating a chocolate ice cream bar.

[El Guapo]

ok - who told hepcat?

[hepcat]

About chocolate ice cream bars? No one, man. It's like my superpower. I was born with an immediate awareness of all ice cream based desserts. If there were an X-Men full of people with powers that were just food based, I'd be their goddamn Professor X.

[coopasonic]

Let me know when they make a show from the Anne Rice Sleeping Beauty books.

[Isgrimnur]

In development hell.

[Sudy]

Saw the first episode before taking a nap and had vivid, sexual dreams that disturbed me greatly. 10/10, would watch again.

[Daehawk]

I remember watching Queen of the Damned then later finding out it was the sequel to Interview With the Vampire. It seemed so different...movie wise. Never read the books.

[Sudy]

I'm nearly caught up and am in awe of this series, the storytelling is marvelous. (I have no experience with the books; I saw the 1994 film probably 20+ years ago and recall being surprised by how much I enjoyed it, but I remember little of it.) Though there's a bit of a believability problem in terms of how much they get away with without being found out or chased out of town or worse to this point in the story. Still, if Walt Longmire can solve a dozen murders a year in one of the least populous regions of the U.S., I guess anything is possible.

[hepcat]

I'm enjoying it, although the casting for Claudia still seems off. That's in no way a complaint about the actress. She's fantastic and I love her performance. It's just that the character is supposed to be a child and she does not, in any way, shape or form look like she's even a tween. I can understand why they followed the same path as the movie adaptation and avoiding making her 5, as that would be really tough for a child actor. But Kirsten Dunst was 11 when she played the character. I think they could have found someone around the same age. Making her basically an adult is kind of distracting when she keeps complaining about being stuck in a child's body.

But maybe it's because the show is going into a far more adult area with the character than the movie did.

[rittchard]

I'm enjoying it, although the casting for Claudia still seems off. That's in no way a complaint about the actress. She's fantastic and I love her performance. It's just that the character is supposed to be a child and she does not, in any way, shape or form look like she's even a tween. I can understand why they followed the same path as the movie adaptation and avoiding making her 5, as that would be really tough for a child actor. But Kirsten Dunst was 11 when she played the character. I think they could have found someone around the same age. Making her basically an adult is kind of distracting when she keeps complaining about being stuck in a child's body.

But maybe it's because the show is going into a far more adult area with the character than the movie did.

I read in an interview they deliberately chose to make the character older, so I don't think there is supposed to be any pretense that she is playing a child. They wanted her to be a bit older than the original book character probably so they could push more teen/adult themes. Oh wait here it is:

https://winteriscoming.net/2022/10/25/w ... pire-show/

She's supposed to be 14, so the "stuck in a child's body" still applies but now she's stuck in an arguably worse age in terms of being hormonal, etc.

[Isgrimnur]

[hepcat]

I'm enjoying it, although the casting for Claudia still seems off. That's in no way a complaint about the actress. She's fantastic and I love her performance. It's just that the character is supposed to be a child and she does not, in any way, shape or form look like she's even a tween. I can understand why they followed the same path as the movie adaptation and avoiding making her 5, as that would be really tough for a child actor. But Kirsten Dunst was 11 when she played the character. I think they could have found someone around the same age. Making her basically an adult is kind of distracting when she keeps complaining about being stuck in a child's body.

But maybe it's because the show is going into a far more adult area with the character than the movie did.

I read in an interview they deliberately chose to make the character older, so I don't think there is supposed to be any pretense that she is playing a child. They wanted her to be a bit older than the original book character probably so they could push more teen/adult themes. Oh wait here it is:

https://winteriscoming.net/2022/10/25/w ... pire-show/

She's supposed to be 14, so the "stuck in a child's body" still applies but now she's stuck in an arguably worse age in terms of being hormonal, etc.

It still doesn't really work though. She looks like a college student, not a junior high school girl. And yes, I know there are instances of many girls mature looking enough at 14 to pass for 18 or even older. But it still takes me out of it because she clearly looks older than 14 to me.

Again, the actress is fantastic. No complaint about her talent. I'm just nitpicking because....well...internet!

[malchior]

And she is an actual tween. I don't know the filming dates or care to do enough research but she was somewhere around 17-18 when this was filmed. So it's not a crazy stretch. They decided to go with petite = young and leave it there maybe to avoid all the headache with hiring an actual age appropriate person with all the overhead that entails around the work rules and standard and practices concerns. I'd be unshocked to hear they aimed for an 18-year old for this reason.

[Sudy]

Yeah, I understand it but I also have no loyalty to the source material. I'd think the material would be far more challenging from the perspective of a young child. But it was presumably handled thoughtfully if people are loyal to it.

[Kraken]

Just finished this and was greatly impressed, especially by the ending. It's many years since I read the books, so tell me -- did season 1 comprise the first two books?

I thought this would be a one-season series, but now I'm looking forward to S2.

[ImLawBoy]

We finished this tonight. Not only does this not cover the first two books, but it doesn't even finish the first book.

Book spoilers (to the best of my recollection):

Spoiler:

The first book has Louis and Claudia going to Europe, and the vampires there, including Armand, put her to death for being an abomination.I don't recall Louis ending up being with Armand - I thought Louis hated him because of his killing of Claudia. It's been a long, long time since I read the books, though, so I may be off there. The second book is essentially Lestat's origin story and wasn't really covered in the show, except that Lestat gave a fairly accurate retelling of his conversion by Magnus (again, to the best of my recollection).

Overall, I thought this was a lot of fun. I liked that they dropped the innuendo of the books and just made Louis and Lestat lovers - it felt more authentic. I also thought the addition of the racial dynamic was handled well. Even when Louis became an immortal demigod, he still had to be publicly subservient to the Man.

Regarding Claudia, I think they probably made the best (or at least safest) choice by aging her up a bit. It's probably most interesting to have a 5 year-old vampire like in the book, but you can't really get a 5 year-old actress to play a blood-sucking monster. Kirsten Dunst was 11 when they filmed the movie, but it's highly unlikely you're going to get that lucky again with an actress that young. Going a bit older means you're likely to get a better performance (plus you're able to explore more mature themes), even though it's not quite as interesting as a child vampire.

[Kraken]

Regarding Claudia, I think they probably made the best (or at least safest) choice by aging her up a bit. It's probably most interesting to have a 5 year-old vampire like in the book, but you can't really get a 5 year-old actress to play a blood-sucking monster. Kirsten Dunst was 11 when they filmed the movie, but it's highly unlikely you're going to get that lucky again with an actress that young. Going a bit older means you're likely to get a better performance (plus you're able to explore more mature themes), even though it's not quite as interesting as a child vampire.

Practically speaking, if your never-aging character is going to be in 2+ seasons, you need an actor who won't grow or mature visibly from year-to-year.

I didn't realize that the series covered so little of the first book. Guess I really don't remember it at all. I vaguely remember Interview as being about Louis, Vampire Lestat as being about Lestat, and Queen of the Damned drifting into Egyptian mythology/vampire origins. I didn't read any books after that.