Current Events > I watched the first episode of "Interview with a Vampire" AMC show

(+) Yeah! (+)

Spoilers
it was NASTY
wtf dude got his a hole punched in his head
u could see the shit come out the other side

love vampires tho

Ewwww you're not telling the truth are you. I was thinking about skimming this show as someone who saw the movie

Ive avoided it as I heard they deviate massively from the source material.

I watched the first season due to all of the positive press...and I really enjoyed it.

I'm hoping the second season ends up being good, too.

I thought it was a lot better than it should have been.

Glob posted...

Ive avoided it as I heard they deviate massively from the source material.

Sounds better then what they did with From Dusk till Dawn. They stayed faithful to the source material, at least for the first season I watched. It felt like watching a low budget version of the movie with hours of filler.

Revisited posted...

Ewwww you're not telling the truth are you. I was thinking about skimming this show as someone who saw the movie

It's pretty graphic compared to the movie. Might keep watching. The first episode was free on Amazon prime video.

Love vampire stuff and this New Orleans setting is giving me the original vibes. I mean I'm used to TVD gore but this was icky.

Tsukasa1891 posted...

Sounds better then what they did with From Dusk till Dawn. They stayed faithful to the source material, at least for the first season I watched. It felt like watching a low budget version of the movie with hours of filler.

I liked what it did with the story post-vampire strip club . The last season floundered tho

Glob posted...

Ive avoided it as I heard they deviate massively from the source material.

I heard it was essentially a sequel. The reporter fact checks some claims from the original interview and is coming back with follow up questions about things that didnt line up. Havent seen it but I thought it was a novel way to make changes.

bfslick50 posted...

I heard it was essentially a sequel. The reporter fact checks some claims from the original interview and is coming back with follow up questions about things that didnt line up. Havent seen it but I thought it was a novel way to make changes.

It's an informal sequel to the book and has some simularities the movie doesn't besides the time shift.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

The Vampire Diaries is really good.

Verdekal posted...

It's an informal sequel to the book and has some simularities the movie doesn't besides the time shift.

The book already has many sequels.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Yes, but if thats too girly for then try The Originals.

it's been a bit since I've watched IWtV, but I think the first episode might be the goriest.

but yea, I also liked TVD & The Originals, with the latter being the better show between them.

I recommend anyone interested in checking out The Originals first watch through TVD until it leads to The Originals' pilot so they can appreciate all the character development that takes place.

Glob posted...

The book already has many sequels.

I said informal. The book's interview takes place around 1973, not far from the book's release. Same is true for the earlier interview between Louis and Daniel in the series.

Glob posted...

Ive avoided it as I heard they deviate massively from the source material.

This. I stopped watching as soon as I heard Louis use the word "bruh". Was like wtf?

Verdekal posted...

I said informal. The book's interview takes place around 1973, not far from the book's release. Same is true for the earlier interview between Louis and Daniel in the series.

Im familiar with the source material, at least as far as Prince Lestat.

But I heard that its set in a different period, which is a change I cant approve of as any I feel that the setting and time period is a key component of the novel. Is that not true?

it takes place during a different time period (starts during the early 20th century - 1910), and the modern day is our modern day.

its time period is as important to the story as anything, though.

also, instead of being a slave owner, Louis is the owner of a brothel.

Glob posted...

Im familiar with the source material, at least as far as Prince Lestat.

But I heard that its set in a different period, which is a change I cant approve of as any I feel that the setting and time period is a key component of the novel. Is that not true?

Well, I'd say Interview is about Louis' journey and existential crisis. The time period it starts in isn't the most important thing regarding that. The 94 movie lacked the relationship factor between Louis and Lestat which This version amps up even more.

I agree that its about his journey primarily, and while the setting is not essential to the plot, Id say that it could affect the flavour, especially as if this one was popular it could then have a knock on effect for other works.

Glob posted...

I agree that its about his journey primarily, and while the setting is not essential to the plot, Id say that it could affect the flavour, especially as if this one was popular it could then have a knock on effect for other works.

Changing the flavor is the intention. I admit, it put me off a bit as first also, but I've grown to like it. Lestat was born the same time as book Lestat and he mentioned Those who Must be Kept. There's also a promotional image of him in season 2 wearing earlier clothing so we will likely see more book faithful time.

Don't forget Louis and Armand traveled together in the 20th century in the book.

Glob posted...

Ive avoided it as I heard they deviate massively from the source material.

Supposedly Anne Rice was involved in early production before she died, so this doesn't make sense. But maybe the studio changed stuff after she died

nah, she was an executive producer, but so is her son, who she collaborated with multiple times.

iirc, he also wrote the pilot for the show, so it's more than likely they signed off on whatever changes happened, since he would have come out about how they went against his mom's/his vision otherwise.

plus the casting happened before she died.

bro im watching episode 2
fucking insane

this is good vampire media

Corbenik posted...

Yes, but if thats too girly for then try The Originals.

Do not watch the Originals before watching the Vampire Diaries.

Corbenik posted...

bro im watching episode 2
fucking insane

this is good vampire media

it really is

Verdekal posted...

Changing the flavor is the intention. I admit, it put me off a bit as first also, but I've grown to like it. Lestat was born the same time as book Lestat and he mentioned Those who Must be Kept. There's also a promotional image of him in season 2 wearing earlier clothing so we will likely see more book faithful time.

Don't forget Louis and Armand traveled together in the 20th century in the book.

Im still not sold on the changing the flavour aspect, but Lestat being kept more similar to the books is a good sign. After all, in the grand scheme of things, hes much more important than Louis.

Zikten posted...

Supposedly Anne Rice was involved in early production before she died, so this doesn't make sense. But maybe the studio changed stuff after she died

boxoto posted...

nah, she was an executive producer, but so is her son, who she collaborated with multiple times.

iirc, he also wrote the pilot for the show, so it's more than likely they signed off on whatever changes happened, since he would have come out about how they went against his mom's/his vision otherwise.

plus the casting happened before she died.

She could have signed off on every single aspect but that wouldnt mean that deviation wasnt deviation.

I don't disagree that it wasn't a deviation; I was just saying that it was a deviation that she likely approved of.

boxoto posted...

I don't disagree that it wasn't a deviation; I was just saying that it was a deviation that she likely approved of.

Fair enough. Im not disputing that at all.

oh, my initial post was responding to the one that quoted you.

these vampires are good cause they

suck out the life they need to to survive but not kill