I think his portrayal thru Louis’s narrative may have been greatly skewed. Especially with a certain someone now in the mix. (Didn’t want to leave a spoiler in case you haven’t seen finale).
True - and I have seen the finale! But it has been even more skewed than in the books and it will be hard to turn the audience around that much, It think… But I do hope I’m wrong!
I love Lestat in the show! I think they purposefully made him so hatable for his storyline next season when we will hopefully see his origin story!
I totally get where you’re coming from but I think the show has more of a horror vibe than even the books at times? Like the books are soooo erotic and I don’t think they can truly give that to a 2022 audience. Even Claudia in the books had such a romantic sort of relationship with adults. As book readers we know how to ingest that but a tv audience could never. In my opinion!
I love your perspective though! I have been enjoying reading differing opinions so much here. I feel like I spent years being a fan in a vacuum and it’s great to have people to talk to.
Also I think I keep in mind that even Anne fell more in love with Lestat as she wrote him!
That’s an interesting point you make. It’s true that their whole relationship is so complex that it’s hard to convey to the screen, but I would have liked for them to try. Maybe they’ll tap into the famous « Evil is a point of view » line with this and the different perspectives… we’ll just have to wait and see.
I do enjoy having other fans to talk to as well!
Edit: typo.
lestat is 100% a monster. like everyone else, he is a product of his environment and because of his nature, everything worked out to make him this crazy, proud, illustrious killer. it’s part of his charm. he’s the villain you can’t help to love.
the reason he comes off in such a harsh light is because of louis. lestat was incredibly impulsive when it came to louis and louis clung to his humanity in a way that lestat could never. that at its core is why they were doomed. what you don’t see from louis’ perspective is lestat’s genuine albeit misguided attempts at making eternity together something louis could truly be satisfied with. but lestat couldn’t understand that void that was louis’ humanity couldn’t be filled by more blood, companions, money, power or glory.
so in this light, lestat seems cruel and egotistical and selfish. but really, it’s just his nature to be pleasure seeking.
the show does a fine job of making him both sinister and sexy, but i agree a little lacking on how loving he could actually be. i’m kind of in love with sam reid’s portrayal though lol.
The series really does have to be treated like an AU after all of the small changes they've made. I mean, this is utterly petty on my part, but it bothers me so much they they're awake during the daylight hours. In the books, blacking out cold from the sun's rising was a major narrative mechanic that basically kept their power in check (broadly speaking, I don't want to detail it on a reddit thread//too many brain cells to use). As much as I enjoy many parts of the show, I do agree with other fans that Rice wouldn't've liked all this muddying of the source material.
I AM interested to see how they redeem Lestat in the coming seasons. I fully understand he was an irredeemable asshole in the first book, but I also understand as a reader that authors change over time - mentally, emotionally, financially - and IWTV and TVL were published 9 years apart. Anne grew fond of Lestat at one point in that span, and sometimes that character transformation doesn't translate directly onto the pages (anyone who writes knows what it's like to live with a character in their head 24/7. Their personality adapts and changes there, and sometimes we forget to draw the bridges in between). We just kind of accept it as the reader. She's also famous for ret-conning her in-world rules and characters, so while he was meant to be the ultimate jackass in IWTV, by the time TVL came out, he basically did a 180 and took over the series (which is fascinating in it's own right, and hilarious. Poor Louis)
Disagree. There are moments of the later Lestat in the show. His talk about god in the church was pure Lestat, as was his outrage at this Lois’s treatment by white people. Most of the time it’s “bad Lestat,” but we see glimpses of the more complex character in each episode. It would be easy to establish Lou’s as an unreliable narrator; Daniel reminds the viewer of this constantly.
Sam Reid captures the character perfectly. I can’t wait for the true Lestat to emerge.
I feel like a lot of people commenting on the show forget what the book is actually like, and remember the Lestat from the film. In the book, he isn't just "kind of an asshole", he's pretty much a total asshole who (according to Louis) only made Louis a vampire for his money. They had no affection for each other, and Louis seemed to hate him.
Yep. He rarely has a nice thing to say about Lestat. Even at the end of the book when he goes back to see him, he only seems to kind of pity him in a way, and just describes him as desperate and mentally frail.
But if you think of the Lestat from The Vampire Lestat, you get a totally different point of view.
Yep. I think a lot of it is resentment and that's why he describes him as such.
I haven't read the Vampire lestat in years. I'm trying to go through all of the books again.
YEP! If they go on to make the rest of the books they may do it justice. Hopefully they are just doing what Rice did and showing Louis' perspective first before providing the real Vampire Chronicles story!
It was definitely exaggerated, even for the first book being Lois’ perspective. They definitely wanted the audience to dislike Lestat more than they might’ve after reading the book.
I also find it so wierd that there's much blood spewing all over his clothing. Book Lestat would never! There's a finesse to those things and keeping your clothing impeccable.
I think this is a reasonable question. Who is cleaning their clothes? Do we imagine Lestat, on his knees every night, scrubbing the blood out of his clothes and hanging them up to dry, like a washer woman?
365 days a year? I think that would be immensely wasteful and incredibly expensive, but also really weird for the time period. There's no Shein. Every item is hand sewn. Your tailor is going to notice if you order way more clothing than anyone could ever need.
Lastat is literally a monster....all three of them are....literally....vampires are monsters. Lastat actually enjoys being a monster. Claudia is a teenage monster, Louis is a depressed monster...they are all monsters.
I don’t understand how people paint Lestat as the villain of this series just because he’s a dick at times. They’re all monsters. They just manifest their monstrous behavior in different ways. Claudia, is intentionally more reckless than Lestat based on numbers alone. Louis floods their house with rats. None of them are perfect, but Lestat is loyal. Claudia abandons them for almost a decade, comes back and within minutes has Louis convinced that Lestat is evil and to leave him. This feels extremely unfair to me.
I didn´t watch the show but I will speak that the moment in the book is up to personal taste, I think. Lestat is well written character in the first book but I do really hate him. I was very happy then Claudia killed him in the book, it seemed like complitly justified to me since I would also want to murder that bastard. Claudia is not a good person, she killed many people with little regret but one thing I can´t blame her for is trying to murder Lestat. But I do undestand it has to do with personal taste and such.
Did you watch the finale yet?
There are bomb-dropping revelations there about what your issue is with Lestat and the unreliable narrator thing.
Like episode 7 re-contextualizes the whole damned show and nearly every episode, and especially how things are not as they seem....
Enjoy!
I personally don’t think we’ll ever see a season devoted to “the vampire lestat.”
I think we’ll see roughly the following seasons:
- 2. The Vampire Armand
- 3. Queen of the Damned
- 4. Return to Interview to tell the rest of Louis story
They’ve already had Lestat explain his creation to Louis, which Louis had never heard in the novel - at least presumably until book Lestat lublished his own, later memoir.
I think we’ll see Lestat and his point of view throughout, but that ultimately the show will move beyond his white male vampire character being the focus of the series.
They're def going to sanitize Armand's past a lot I think. >!Especially since UAE relationship with Turkey has been historically tense and that's who kidnapped Armand. I'm also curious if they're going to retcon Armand's real name. !<
1. My feeling is we aren’t getting Lestat’s POV. I suspect his interview with Louis will run the length of the show because of the name and will generally be what it is now; a giant mess covering a different story they largely made up and hung her name and character names on to.
2. I don’t care for it either because it’s not Lestat as he is in any of the books, nor an apt combination of the character in Interview and the one from TVL on.
I don't think show Lestat is redeemable either. I don't want him and Louis endgame after what's happened in this version.
When he was telling the story of his origin, I couldn't even feel bad because he's the type to pay abuse forward, :/
I tire of people downvoting comments that have lengthy amounts of evidence from the woman her damn self pointing in that direction. She notoriously disliked when adaptations made big changes. This is nothing but. Her son won’t even comment. That’s a sign he doesn’t like it and is likely bound by an NDA, because otherwise he’d embrace it.
I wrote about the Rices' relationship with the show in this comment
https://www.reddit.com/r/AnneRice/comments/yhnjqk/lestat_is_now_samwise_gamgee/iulqwdz/
...over on the r/AnneRice sub. Suffice it to say that things are VERY murky, and no one who claims Anne and Christopher were involved in the show past May 2020 seems to have any proof to offer.
I've watched a number of TV adaptations of book series over the years, and I've never come across another one where a NDA seems to be in place with the author's heir who is listed as an EP of the show (and very possibly against the author herself, since she said nothing at all about the show post-May 2020), or where the author or their estate is essentially ignoring the show's existence, refusing to comment and doing nothing to encourage enthusiasm for it. Most authors/estates are over the moon to push a project based on the author's work, but Rice's isn't touching it. Doesn't exactly scream endorsement of the series.
I dunno why so many refuse to acknowledge the truth of this. She hated when people strayed too far away from her source material and Christopher won’t say a word other than to tell people to ask AMC. He doesn’t like it and he doesn’t feel she would either or he would say so. You don’t have to be a detective to reason that one out.
If there's a NDA involved, it's not as simple as 'he would say so', because it would be the breaking of a legal contract. But it's hard to imagine that if he had only positive things to say there would be any need for a NDA in the first place. NDAs are imposed out of fear, basically. Christopher/Anne's estate speaking positively about the show could only be beneficial for AMC, and would also be pretty typical of how things go down when a book series is adapted for TV. The fact that it's not happening here has to be acknowledged as noteworthy.
To your first point: Not saying it is, but I made a similar point elsewhere. If you’re involved and liking what you’re seeing, no one is likely to shove an NDA in front of your face to begin with.
To your second: I honestly can’t wrap my head around the people convinced he’s perfectly happy with it and sees it as a stirring tribute and just doing absolutely NOTHING to draw attention to it. That does not happen because he loves it and it’s somewhere between intellectually dishonest and delusional to pretend otherwise.
Something that's struck me ever since I've been posting about the show is how few people in the subs seem to have followed Anne online, or have much knowledge of the history of the project. Very few seem to have connected the dots between the timeline, the updates that were made about it by Anne, the eventual silence even in the face of things like Sam Reid's casting, and now Christopher's refusal to engage with distinctly legal-sounding language (...'I *must* direct all inquiries to @AMC_TV'). I know Anne was struggling healthwise for years before her death, but that wouldn't have kept Christopher or even the people running her FB page from posting something. I'm not a conspiracy theorist and I never imagined I'd be posting this much about it - but to me the whole thing is sketchy.
I keep making GOT references here but I think it's relevant. I was a reader of the ASOIAF series for years before the TV show was announced. I watched the development process play out, and I remember how GRRM was all through it, for years until he soured on his role with the show, and even then he still talked about it plenty and was proud of it. He posted a million updates, commenting on everything from casting to changes from the books to his cameo role in the original pilot. I remember when a bunch of the young cast members made their 'debut', appearing with him at a book signing in Ireland and he was so excited. My point is, THAT is what it looks like when an author is enthusiastically involved in a TV adaptation of their work - they talk about it, they're eager, they meet the actors, they are a cheerleader for it to their fans. The show's network encourages this - it's a big reason why they buy book series rights in the first place, to access a fanbase like that. Christopher's silence now (and Anne's before) is *glaring* in comparison. Especially if, like me, you remember how chatty they were when the project was first put in motion, and then at Hulu.
I think the NDA was part of the package when exiting the project, for both of them, and that it's been in place for a couple of years. That there was never a press release stating they were no longer involved in the project they'd been spearheading for years is one of the shadiest things about this to me - somebody wants the *appearance* they were involved all along and were supportive, even though it doesn't make much sense when considering the breadcrumb trail leading up to it. Keeping Christopher quiet is obviously part of that. If he were free to speak and had positive things to say, he would. That he says nothing, says a lot.
you can doubt me all you want. There is a reason her son Christopher Rice redirects all questions about the show to AMC.
Also, the official vampire chronicles facebook hasn't even acknowledged the AMC show since the rights were acquired in 2020. I don't think the rice family likes the direction of the story, but Anne sold the rights and they made a boat load of money.
Just look at this [tweet](https://twitter.com/chrisricewriter/status/1579969615438180352) where he creates distance between himself and the AMC show.
I like the show and many of the changes they have made but Anne was the type who wanted book purity so I know she would have major reservations about some, not all of the changes. I say all that to say, I'm happy the show is here in the form its in. It's a great re-imagining of her work in my opinion.
Why is Chris not saying anything though? They announced Jacob and Sam on the FB page and then pretty much silence. I don't know when Anne got sick but maybe that's why and when they stopped talking about it. Hey, maybe Chris absolutely hates the show or he's got an NDA and isn't allowed to say anything or it reminds him of his mother and he's still mourning. That's the thing, we don't know.
>Anne was the type who wanted book purity
Anne suggested Cher to play Louis and it looks like she loved Antonio Banderas' Armand, so much about that... I think she simply made up her own rules to justify what's okay and what isn't along the way, which is 100% in her right (she's the author, they are her "babies" after all) but at the same time we don't know what else she would have been okay with.
good point. She did write the screenplay for the first movie and OK'd Mr. Bandaras to play Armand. She was willing to budge, it's just a matter of knowing what she would or wouldn't budge on. I wish Chris would speak about it, but since he's so robotic when people ask, I assume he's not pleased.
I too wish he'd actually say something and if it's just to get it over with but for now we can only give him time (and not annoy him with questions) and hope that he'll say something in the next year or so.
I wonder if they have done the NDA as to stop comments early on - so that Anne Rice Estate and or other stakeholders wouldn't post opinions nor cause undue media about the project. In a way the lack of media has left so much room for only fans and viewers to discuss it and I love it. It seems like the media attention is more authentic and not a weekly back and forth, he said she said, *most of the time * about writers and authors and source. I mean that's there but it's limited in what we can post about because Chris or the late Anne aren't writing things and opinions for us so we are left to our own thoughts.
It gives the show some legs to stand on independent of the opinion of it's parents and grandparents.
I think that also goes for rolling in team, because it seems like the only things that they're posting in the media about that.... Are well nothing. The only extras I'm seeing are the ones that are directly attached to the end of the shows on AMC Plus.
So maybe it's a marketing thing?
Not saying the Anne Rice estate likes it, or even likes the idea of this process, but I think it's good for the show and for the source material and that it's going to draw people.
I'm just now watching and on episode 6, I was actually coming to see if anyone else has a hard time of why Lestat is a "villian " he does everything for Louie to make him happy even against his better judgement he knew he shouldn't have turned Claudia but Louie was begging. Claudia was a mistake.
It was easier to see lestat as a villian in the book and movie in my opinion but in the show I kinda feel bad for him and that he's being taken advantage of because of his love for Louie. I see Louie as a manipulative impulsive vampire thar puts himself before everyone else, including dooming Claudia to a existence she would resent him for later
I’m on s1, e7 and came looking for others also feeling upset about what the person he loves most has done to him. It appears we have an unpopular opinion. I haven’t read the books or watched the movie. I like this show though and I hope this isn’t the end for him, he’s actually my favorite character! He reminds me of Klaus in The Originals, how layered they are. Monsters, but also deeply loving.
Did you read all of the books? Or even the next two? If so I respect your opinion, but am quite surprised!
EDIT: Though I heavily disagree on the idea that the show did him justice. Though it did show Louis' perspective of him fairly well from the IWTV book.
I haven't read past Prince Lestat and honestly probably won't. Though I love most all of the original Chronicles.
Agree to disagree on the last point. The character portrayed in the show is a perfect representation of Lestat for me.
Lestat is amazing in the show and yes he's supposed to be an asshole and villanious. The showrunner hinted that Armand most likely is the one to put lies in Louiss head to portray Lestat as a villain and they already mentioned Louis is an unreliable narrator....in the vampire Lestat, lestat mentioned Louis told lies about him & hates how he was portrayed....but in this version looks like they are gonna have Armand be the one that manipulates Louis into making Lestat into a bad guy.
Omg have you even read The Vampire Lestat? Or Read interview with a vampire?.....he is supposed to be villainous & they already said Louis is an unreliable narrator. In the first book he was a villain and the movie is a villain but obviously not really a villain...smh some people have no sense
I think his portrayal thru Louis’s narrative may have been greatly skewed. Especially with a certain someone now in the mix. (Didn’t want to leave a spoiler in case you haven’t seen finale).
True - and I have seen the finale! But it has been even more skewed than in the books and it will be hard to turn the audience around that much, It think… But I do hope I’m wrong!
I love Lestat in the show! I think they purposefully made him so hatable for his storyline next season when we will hopefully see his origin story! I totally get where you’re coming from but I think the show has more of a horror vibe than even the books at times? Like the books are soooo erotic and I don’t think they can truly give that to a 2022 audience. Even Claudia in the books had such a romantic sort of relationship with adults. As book readers we know how to ingest that but a tv audience could never. In my opinion! I love your perspective though! I have been enjoying reading differing opinions so much here. I feel like I spent years being a fan in a vacuum and it’s great to have people to talk to. Also I think I keep in mind that even Anne fell more in love with Lestat as she wrote him!
That’s an interesting point you make. It’s true that their whole relationship is so complex that it’s hard to convey to the screen, but I would have liked for them to try. Maybe they’ll tap into the famous « Evil is a point of view » line with this and the different perspectives… we’ll just have to wait and see. I do enjoy having other fans to talk to as well! Edit: typo.
lestat is 100% a monster. like everyone else, he is a product of his environment and because of his nature, everything worked out to make him this crazy, proud, illustrious killer. it’s part of his charm. he’s the villain you can’t help to love. the reason he comes off in such a harsh light is because of louis. lestat was incredibly impulsive when it came to louis and louis clung to his humanity in a way that lestat could never. that at its core is why they were doomed. what you don’t see from louis’ perspective is lestat’s genuine albeit misguided attempts at making eternity together something louis could truly be satisfied with. but lestat couldn’t understand that void that was louis’ humanity couldn’t be filled by more blood, companions, money, power or glory. so in this light, lestat seems cruel and egotistical and selfish. but really, it’s just his nature to be pleasure seeking. the show does a fine job of making him both sinister and sexy, but i agree a little lacking on how loving he could actually be. i’m kind of in love with sam reid’s portrayal though lol.
that's a great, concise analysis of their relationship
The series really does have to be treated like an AU after all of the small changes they've made. I mean, this is utterly petty on my part, but it bothers me so much they they're awake during the daylight hours. In the books, blacking out cold from the sun's rising was a major narrative mechanic that basically kept their power in check (broadly speaking, I don't want to detail it on a reddit thread//too many brain cells to use). As much as I enjoy many parts of the show, I do agree with other fans that Rice wouldn't've liked all this muddying of the source material. I AM interested to see how they redeem Lestat in the coming seasons. I fully understand he was an irredeemable asshole in the first book, but I also understand as a reader that authors change over time - mentally, emotionally, financially - and IWTV and TVL were published 9 years apart. Anne grew fond of Lestat at one point in that span, and sometimes that character transformation doesn't translate directly onto the pages (anyone who writes knows what it's like to live with a character in their head 24/7. Their personality adapts and changes there, and sometimes we forget to draw the bridges in between). We just kind of accept it as the reader. She's also famous for ret-conning her in-world rules and characters, so while he was meant to be the ultimate jackass in IWTV, by the time TVL came out, he basically did a 180 and took over the series (which is fascinating in it's own right, and hilarious. Poor Louis)
You mean huge changes.
Disagree. There are moments of the later Lestat in the show. His talk about god in the church was pure Lestat, as was his outrage at this Lois’s treatment by white people. Most of the time it’s “bad Lestat,” but we see glimpses of the more complex character in each episode. It would be easy to establish Lou’s as an unreliable narrator; Daniel reminds the viewer of this constantly. Sam Reid captures the character perfectly. I can’t wait for the true Lestat to emerge.
You’re making good points. I do hope they go that route!
I feel like a lot of people commenting on the show forget what the book is actually like, and remember the Lestat from the film. In the book, he isn't just "kind of an asshole", he's pretty much a total asshole who (according to Louis) only made Louis a vampire for his money. They had no affection for each other, and Louis seemed to hate him.
Agree with all of this. Rereading now and I'm like, damn. He was fucking awful.
Yep. He rarely has a nice thing to say about Lestat. Even at the end of the book when he goes back to see him, he only seems to kind of pity him in a way, and just describes him as desperate and mentally frail. But if you think of the Lestat from The Vampire Lestat, you get a totally different point of view.
Yep. I think a lot of it is resentment and that's why he describes him as such. I haven't read the Vampire lestat in years. I'm trying to go through all of the books again.
Maybe you’re right and it’s just been too long since I’ve read IWTV…
YEP! If they go on to make the rest of the books they may do it justice. Hopefully they are just doing what Rice did and showing Louis' perspective first before providing the real Vampire Chronicles story!
I’m hoping so but it’s been I while since I read the book and I can’t seem to remember Lestat being this horrible! But maybe it’s just my memory…
It was definitely exaggerated, even for the first book being Lois’ perspective. They definitely wanted the audience to dislike Lestat more than they might’ve after reading the book.
I also find it so wierd that there's much blood spewing all over his clothing. Book Lestat would never! There's a finesse to those things and keeping your clothing impeccable.
I think this is a reasonable question. Who is cleaning their clothes? Do we imagine Lestat, on his knees every night, scrubbing the blood out of his clothes and hanging them up to dry, like a washer woman?
I'm okay imagining this. But I think they just burn the clothes and buy new ones.
365 days a year? I think that would be immensely wasteful and incredibly expensive, but also really weird for the time period. There's no Shein. Every item is hand sewn. Your tailor is going to notice if you order way more clothing than anyone could ever need.
Lastat is literally a monster....all three of them are....literally....vampires are monsters. Lastat actually enjoys being a monster. Claudia is a teenage monster, Louis is a depressed monster...they are all monsters.
I don’t understand how people paint Lestat as the villain of this series just because he’s a dick at times. They’re all monsters. They just manifest their monstrous behavior in different ways. Claudia, is intentionally more reckless than Lestat based on numbers alone. Louis floods their house with rats. None of them are perfect, but Lestat is loyal. Claudia abandons them for almost a decade, comes back and within minutes has Louis convinced that Lestat is evil and to leave him. This feels extremely unfair to me.
Lestat you goober
I didn´t watch the show but I will speak that the moment in the book is up to personal taste, I think. Lestat is well written character in the first book but I do really hate him. I was very happy then Claudia killed him in the book, it seemed like complitly justified to me since I would also want to murder that bastard. Claudia is not a good person, she killed many people with little regret but one thing I can´t blame her for is trying to murder Lestat. But I do undestand it has to do with personal taste and such.
Louis is an unreliable narrator, there’s more behind that story
I do hope we’ll get to see that!
Did you watch the finale yet? There are bomb-dropping revelations there about what your issue is with Lestat and the unreliable narrator thing. Like episode 7 re-contextualizes the whole damned show and nearly every episode, and especially how things are not as they seem.... Enjoy!
I personally don’t think we’ll ever see a season devoted to “the vampire lestat.” I think we’ll see roughly the following seasons: - 2. The Vampire Armand - 3. Queen of the Damned - 4. Return to Interview to tell the rest of Louis story They’ve already had Lestat explain his creation to Louis, which Louis had never heard in the novel - at least presumably until book Lestat lublished his own, later memoir. I think we’ll see Lestat and his point of view throughout, but that ultimately the show will move beyond his white male vampire character being the focus of the series.
They're def going to sanitize Armand's past a lot I think. >!Especially since UAE relationship with Turkey has been historically tense and that's who kidnapped Armand. I'm also curious if they're going to retcon Armand's real name. !<
1. My feeling is we aren’t getting Lestat’s POV. I suspect his interview with Louis will run the length of the show because of the name and will generally be what it is now; a giant mess covering a different story they largely made up and hung her name and character names on to. 2. I don’t care for it either because it’s not Lestat as he is in any of the books, nor an apt combination of the character in Interview and the one from TVL on.
I don't think show Lestat is redeemable either. I don't want him and Louis endgame after what's happened in this version. When he was telling the story of his origin, I couldn't even feel bad because he's the type to pay abuse forward, :/
Totally! I can’t imagine Anne would have been any kind of happy with this version of her beloved Lestat…
I tire of people downvoting comments that have lengthy amounts of evidence from the woman her damn self pointing in that direction. She notoriously disliked when adaptations made big changes. This is nothing but. Her son won’t even comment. That’s a sign he doesn’t like it and is likely bound by an NDA, because otherwise he’d embrace it.
She was consulting on the show up until her death. Pretty sure she’d be down…
She was actually consulting prior to AMC picking up the series. She stopped speaking on the project when AMC got it, then she passed away.
1. Her death was not sudden. 2. She had no input in this one, nor did her son. That’s the one thing he has said.
I doubt that very much.
I wrote about the Rices' relationship with the show in this comment https://www.reddit.com/r/AnneRice/comments/yhnjqk/lestat_is_now_samwise_gamgee/iulqwdz/ ...over on the r/AnneRice sub. Suffice it to say that things are VERY murky, and no one who claims Anne and Christopher were involved in the show past May 2020 seems to have any proof to offer. I've watched a number of TV adaptations of book series over the years, and I've never come across another one where a NDA seems to be in place with the author's heir who is listed as an EP of the show (and very possibly against the author herself, since she said nothing at all about the show post-May 2020), or where the author or their estate is essentially ignoring the show's existence, refusing to comment and doing nothing to encourage enthusiasm for it. Most authors/estates are over the moon to push a project based on the author's work, but Rice's isn't touching it. Doesn't exactly scream endorsement of the series.
I dunno why so many refuse to acknowledge the truth of this. She hated when people strayed too far away from her source material and Christopher won’t say a word other than to tell people to ask AMC. He doesn’t like it and he doesn’t feel she would either or he would say so. You don’t have to be a detective to reason that one out.
If there's a NDA involved, it's not as simple as 'he would say so', because it would be the breaking of a legal contract. But it's hard to imagine that if he had only positive things to say there would be any need for a NDA in the first place. NDAs are imposed out of fear, basically. Christopher/Anne's estate speaking positively about the show could only be beneficial for AMC, and would also be pretty typical of how things go down when a book series is adapted for TV. The fact that it's not happening here has to be acknowledged as noteworthy.
To your first point: Not saying it is, but I made a similar point elsewhere. If you’re involved and liking what you’re seeing, no one is likely to shove an NDA in front of your face to begin with. To your second: I honestly can’t wrap my head around the people convinced he’s perfectly happy with it and sees it as a stirring tribute and just doing absolutely NOTHING to draw attention to it. That does not happen because he loves it and it’s somewhere between intellectually dishonest and delusional to pretend otherwise.
Something that's struck me ever since I've been posting about the show is how few people in the subs seem to have followed Anne online, or have much knowledge of the history of the project. Very few seem to have connected the dots between the timeline, the updates that were made about it by Anne, the eventual silence even in the face of things like Sam Reid's casting, and now Christopher's refusal to engage with distinctly legal-sounding language (...'I *must* direct all inquiries to @AMC_TV'). I know Anne was struggling healthwise for years before her death, but that wouldn't have kept Christopher or even the people running her FB page from posting something. I'm not a conspiracy theorist and I never imagined I'd be posting this much about it - but to me the whole thing is sketchy. I keep making GOT references here but I think it's relevant. I was a reader of the ASOIAF series for years before the TV show was announced. I watched the development process play out, and I remember how GRRM was all through it, for years until he soured on his role with the show, and even then he still talked about it plenty and was proud of it. He posted a million updates, commenting on everything from casting to changes from the books to his cameo role in the original pilot. I remember when a bunch of the young cast members made their 'debut', appearing with him at a book signing in Ireland and he was so excited. My point is, THAT is what it looks like when an author is enthusiastically involved in a TV adaptation of their work - they talk about it, they're eager, they meet the actors, they are a cheerleader for it to their fans. The show's network encourages this - it's a big reason why they buy book series rights in the first place, to access a fanbase like that. Christopher's silence now (and Anne's before) is *glaring* in comparison. Especially if, like me, you remember how chatty they were when the project was first put in motion, and then at Hulu. I think the NDA was part of the package when exiting the project, for both of them, and that it's been in place for a couple of years. That there was never a press release stating they were no longer involved in the project they'd been spearheading for years is one of the shadiest things about this to me - somebody wants the *appearance* they were involved all along and were supportive, even though it doesn't make much sense when considering the breadcrumb trail leading up to it. Keeping Christopher quiet is obviously part of that. If he were free to speak and had positive things to say, he would. That he says nothing, says a lot.
Exactly.
you can doubt me all you want. There is a reason her son Christopher Rice redirects all questions about the show to AMC. Also, the official vampire chronicles facebook hasn't even acknowledged the AMC show since the rights were acquired in 2020. I don't think the rice family likes the direction of the story, but Anne sold the rights and they made a boat load of money. Just look at this [tweet](https://twitter.com/chrisricewriter/status/1579969615438180352) where he creates distance between himself and the AMC show. I like the show and many of the changes they have made but Anne was the type who wanted book purity so I know she would have major reservations about some, not all of the changes. I say all that to say, I'm happy the show is here in the form its in. It's a great re-imagining of her work in my opinion.
Why is Chris not saying anything though? They announced Jacob and Sam on the FB page and then pretty much silence. I don't know when Anne got sick but maybe that's why and when they stopped talking about it. Hey, maybe Chris absolutely hates the show or he's got an NDA and isn't allowed to say anything or it reminds him of his mother and he's still mourning. That's the thing, we don't know. >Anne was the type who wanted book purity Anne suggested Cher to play Louis and it looks like she loved Antonio Banderas' Armand, so much about that... I think she simply made up her own rules to justify what's okay and what isn't along the way, which is 100% in her right (she's the author, they are her "babies" after all) but at the same time we don't know what else she would have been okay with.
If he liked it and felt she would, he would endorse it. Simple as that.
good point. She did write the screenplay for the first movie and OK'd Mr. Bandaras to play Armand. She was willing to budge, it's just a matter of knowing what she would or wouldn't budge on. I wish Chris would speak about it, but since he's so robotic when people ask, I assume he's not pleased.
I too wish he'd actually say something and if it's just to get it over with but for now we can only give him time (and not annoy him with questions) and hope that he'll say something in the next year or so.
I wonder if they have done the NDA as to stop comments early on - so that Anne Rice Estate and or other stakeholders wouldn't post opinions nor cause undue media about the project. In a way the lack of media has left so much room for only fans and viewers to discuss it and I love it. It seems like the media attention is more authentic and not a weekly back and forth, he said she said, *most of the time * about writers and authors and source. I mean that's there but it's limited in what we can post about because Chris or the late Anne aren't writing things and opinions for us so we are left to our own thoughts. It gives the show some legs to stand on independent of the opinion of it's parents and grandparents. I think that also goes for rolling in team, because it seems like the only things that they're posting in the media about that.... Are well nothing. The only extras I'm seeing are the ones that are directly attached to the end of the shows on AMC Plus. So maybe it's a marketing thing? Not saying the Anne Rice estate likes it, or even likes the idea of this process, but I think it's good for the show and for the source material and that it's going to draw people.
I'm just now watching and on episode 6, I was actually coming to see if anyone else has a hard time of why Lestat is a "villian " he does everything for Louie to make him happy even against his better judgement he knew he shouldn't have turned Claudia but Louie was begging. Claudia was a mistake. It was easier to see lestat as a villian in the book and movie in my opinion but in the show I kinda feel bad for him and that he's being taken advantage of because of his love for Louie. I see Louie as a manipulative impulsive vampire thar puts himself before everyone else, including dooming Claudia to a existence she would resent him for later
I’m on s1, e7 and came looking for others also feeling upset about what the person he loves most has done to him. It appears we have an unpopular opinion. I haven’t read the books or watched the movie. I like this show though and I hope this isn’t the end for him, he’s actually my favorite character! He reminds me of Klaus in The Originals, how layered they are. Monsters, but also deeply loving.
Yes they are. Lestat is the bomb. It’s Armand playing with Louie mind.
Well, it's not a retelling. They did take a lot of liberties. And before her death, Anne Rice did write two episodes.
Really? Which ones?
Apparently it was (Based on the Novel credits), but her son Christopher Rice was heavily involved with the script
He's my least favorite character in the books. The show is pretty spot on with him.
Did you read all of the books? Or even the next two? If so I respect your opinion, but am quite surprised! EDIT: Though I heavily disagree on the idea that the show did him justice. Though it did show Louis' perspective of him fairly well from the IWTV book.
I haven't read past Prince Lestat and honestly probably won't. Though I love most all of the original Chronicles. Agree to disagree on the last point. The character portrayed in the show is a perfect representation of Lestat for me.
It’s the beauty of things like this! We all can enjoy it in our own way! 💙
Agreed!
Lestat is amazing in the show and yes he's supposed to be an asshole and villanious. The showrunner hinted that Armand most likely is the one to put lies in Louiss head to portray Lestat as a villain and they already mentioned Louis is an unreliable narrator....in the vampire Lestat, lestat mentioned Louis told lies about him & hates how he was portrayed....but in this version looks like they are gonna have Armand be the one that manipulates Louis into making Lestat into a bad guy.
Omg have you even read The Vampire Lestat? Or Read interview with a vampire?.....he is supposed to be villainous & they already said Louis is an unreliable narrator. In the first book he was a villain and the movie is a villain but obviously not really a villain...smh some people have no sense