Gallery

luanna801:

i-want-my-iwtv:

thegoombs:

Lestat, the prince of all vampires, now confirmed for people of Walmart.com

Response to this inspiring post by @luthi69

@luthiluthi!

Okay but this is particularly hilarious to me because this is exactly the kind of thing Lestat canonically drags Louis for doing. Like when they get into one of their big fights in IWtV and Lestat snarks about Louis “staring for hours at candles as if they were people and standing in the rain like a zombie until your clothes are drenched and you smell like old wardrobe trunks in attics and have the look of a baffled idiot at the zoo.”

… And meanwhile he’s over here getting mesmerized by a freakin’ Wal-Mart. He’s such an absolute hypocrite and I kind of find it hilarious. Like OK Lestat, maybe Louis stares at candles like they’re people, but at least it’s more poetic than being “spellbound” by the dang aspirin bottles.

#also this art is AMAZING bless you OP #the vampire chronicles #anne rice #gorgeous art #awesome fanart #lestat de lioncourt #interview with the vampire #the tale of the body thief #funny #hilarious! #like in fairness I absolutely get why someone from 18th century France would be awe-struck by being in a Wal-Mart #even before you bring his super-intense vampire senses into the equation #but like if Lestat’s gonna dish it out at Louis that way he absolutely deserves to have it thrown back at him #that’s just how it is 😛

^^^Excellent points & tags @luanna801!

L – Louis/Lucien, E – Etienne, S – Sebastien, T – Thomas, A – Augustin, T – Thierry

^Re: names for Lestat’s brothers, yes, good! 

Here’s a baby Lestat for ya:

image

More good de Lioncourt sibling name comments:

@luanna801 said: Okay, I like Etienne and Mireille, and for the others I’m going with Laurent, Seraphin, Theophile, and Thibault. (Judging by ‘Lestat’ Gabrielle liked somewhat unusual names, so I tried to reflect that in some of these. ‘Theophile’ is also a reference to 19th-century French writer Theophile Gautier, who published one of the first vampire stories in 1836.)

@luanna801 said (re: Louis de Lioncourt): @mntyaggrssnOh man, that would’ve been awkward! I’m sure he’d get over it, but it would probably be really weird at first to be calling your lover by the same name as a sibling. (I tend to think not, though – Lestat probably would’ve mentioned it at some point if Louis had the same name as his brother.)

Gallery

luanna801:

takemetocoffin-or-losemeforever:

i-want-my-iwtv:

“Why do you say such things?”

I think
it’s my favorite scene in the movie, because it’s the one where – when you are
blank of later stories portrayal – you realize that Lestat is not this
one-dimensional villain. This scene is so symptomatic of his attitude:
first he’s all flame and rage, then he casts a bard, and
while fiercely smiling over his “victory”, he already regrets what he just said.
He does have a conscience, whatever kind of nasty or stupid things he can come up with, and he’s genuinely affected and
struggled by what he’s inflicting on his loved ones. He’s without any shadow of a doubt an unbearable brat, but also so much more than that. It’s not that this
dork has no affection for Louis and Claudia – he indubitably does – it’s just
than he doesn’t know how to hold a close/family relationship without being sometimes unfair and/or cruel.

Big shout
out for Kristen Dunst and Tom Cruise here, by the way. They are both amazing.

I always think the look on Lestat’s face here is him realizing is that he genuinely doesn’t have an answer for Claudia’s question. Even he doesn’t know why he acts the way he does. I think he sincerely does want them to be a happy family, and yet he’s continually the one getting in the way of that by treating Louis and Claudia does. Even here, he’s obviously touched and happy at the idea of making peace with Claudia – “We forgive each other, then?” – and yet he instinctively still twists the knife in with what he says to her. He’s making himself miserable almost as much as Louis and Claudia, but he can’t seem to just snap out of it and be a genuinely good father or partner. And deep down, I don’t think he even really understands why he’s doing it.

It’s a question for the audience to think about too, I think – why does he do it? I think when you know his backstory, you have to wonder if on some level he associates love with being hurt, and he’d rather be the one hurting others than getting hurt again. Or maybe he just literally has no idea how to have a healthy relationship or a healthy family, since the family he grew up with was horribly abusive and he hasn’t really had any positive relationships since then. (His mother and Nicki are the two possible exceptions to that, but they both came with some serious complications and ultimately dysfunction.) None of this excuses the way he acts in any way, of course – it just is interesting to think about how he became the way he is.

Dracula 200% does not have any characters who turn into passive pawns devoid of personality, IMO. (Dracula *tries* to turn Mina into a pawn, quite literally through mind-control, but it ends up backfiring spectacularly when she turns their psychic connection back around on him to help defeat him.) The main issue with it as regards what radiatorfromspace wants is that all the canon romances are between humans. (Dracula/Mina was a thing added in by later movie adaptations)

(cont’d) (I mean, you could make an argument for Dracula and his Brides, but nothing about their relationship is really shown as positive or romantic. Everything else consists of vampires victimizing unwilling humans, which is definitely not romantic *or* consensual.)

[^This was a followup response to this post from @radiatorfromspace​]

Thanks for this addition, @luanna801!

(Dracula *tries* to turn Mina into a pawn, quite literally through mind-control, but it ends up backfiring spectacularly when she turns their psychic connection back around on him to help defeat him.) 

^Hmmmm, maybe I’ll give it a try, that’s intriguing. I’ve seen a few of the film adaptations but not watched them with the attention they deserved.

image

Re: Dracula and his Brides, I like this comparison pic of them from the 1931 “Dracula” v. the ones from the 2004 ”VAN HELSING”, and while I haven’t watched the ‘31 adaptation, from this still one could argue that they look frumpy/dowdy by today’s standards, but maybe they’re MORE scary bc of the no-frills aesthetic. Could be that that way of dressing and hairstyling was sexual and scary for its time. Plus historical context, the Depression, World War I, all that stuff would need to be considered.

The Brides always struck me as being pretty flat, I don’t remember them having distinctive personalities, and maybe the polygamy of it felt like Dracula was collecting a harem rather than really respecting and loving each of them as individuals, but again, I haven’t read the book to know if they do each have their own developed character and/or a more substantive relationship with him. Or maybe the sister-wife aspect was part of the horror of the story, or perhaps the story was ahead of its time in terms of polyamory being more socially accepted today. Again, historical context would be needed for all of that, but it’s all good food for thought.

(I mean, you could make an argument for Dracula and his Brides, but nothing about their relationship is really shown as positive or romantic. Everything else consists of vampires victimizing unwilling humans, which is definitely not romantic *or* consensual.)

I’ll leave this part unaddressed bc I’m not invested enough in Dracula to engage in a discussion about this part, I hope that’s okay with you.