Hi, it's us. The fans and viewers ofAnne Rice, The Vampire Chronicles and AMC Immortal Universe.
We wanted to have a talk with you that’s been long overdue. And I think it's best to address this as Louis would. With hard words and soft words.
Soft words. The AMC Immortal Universe is a massive dream come true for a lot of us. The fans who have read Anne Rice books since the 80s and the fans who grew up watching the 1990s and 2000s IWTV and QOTD movies. And then there's the new fans who came on board from other spaces like the Hannibal fandom who found a new gothic fiction home when we felt like we lost ours in 2015.
The initial reaction to the revival of what was IWTV was I'm sure mixed, what with Louis being reimagined as a Creole man and Armand being a brown man. Not to mention all the sexy gay vampire themes that were going on that I'm sure not everyone was on board with. But you stuck to your guns and you made a whole new universe with confidence and surety that this is what was meant to be. And you were right. We're so glad that you decided to take the show in the direction that you did and for a lot of us, this is what is cemented as The Vampire Chronicles.
Other things that have never failed to amaze us are the perfect casting choices for every character, the magic that Daniel Hart's music brings to the story, and the costume and make up team that always brings passion to the fashion. The aesthetics of this series is truly something to behold. We truly love this series with all of our hearts. IWTV was such an explosive array of wonder since its pilot and it has been a wonder to all of us since then.
Hard words. We have witnessed the noticeable drop in writing quality in the new season The Vampire Lestat and that is not our only concern. We have also noticed a major pacing issue past episode 2, flanderization of characters, the meta commentary ad nauseam, and most notably the consistently antiblack writing for characters of color.
The AMC Immortal Universe has never been shy about issues of race and racism since day one given that Louis had been cast as a Creole man with Jacob Anderson and Armand as a French-Bengali man with Assad Zamman. Seasons 1-2 masterfully handled these themes in not only New Orleans, but also Romania and Paris. In fact, it was one of if not the central thing in IWTV that was praised among fans and critics alike when it aired. The incredible details to historical facts, rich cultural aesthetics, multilingual mastery, and confronting the brutal truths of America and Europe's history of slavery and racism were what we could consistently and confidently hold pride in when we recommended this show to others. But after this new season, we are unsure if we still hold that pride within us.
In the first two seasons you had core Black writers in the room who were Ben Philippe, David B Harris, and A. Zell Williams who brought their experience and expertise into the scripts. As did director Keith Powell. Their absence and the absence of any Black writers in the writing room this season has reflected in the show’s overall quality, especially in the characters. To say that you have handled it poorly is an understatement.
There were 4 new Black characters introduced to the show yet they have had no character development and were more or less used for plot device and decorative stereotypes. The scammer. The crack whore. The eye candy boyfriend. What will you do with the Queen, we wonder. We also couldn’t help but notice that you hired a South Asian writer this season and yet she has contributed virtually nothing to Armand’s development this season. In fact, the brown characters in this show constantly seem to be the bad guys doing bad things to Black people. Claudia’s monologue in the seance scene was riddled in racist and misogynistic connotations including casually throwing around the word “slave” and “nappy headed” and claiming that she hated Louis more than her literal rapist and murderers. Nevermind the fact that she said Lestat was her “blood” and she liked him better, which contradicted all of S2 Claudia’s development as a Black female character. Louis had lost practically all of his character growth from the first two seasons that he was reduced to a “pimp” and a failure of a “good Negro” who bends to others around him. Even before the gory torture scene, the fandom was literally asking “Why do the writers hate Louis?”. And we most certainly did not miss the off brand "bucket of Louisiana fried chicken" joke in episode 4. Nor the highly uncomfortable absolutely tone deaf excuse filled After Dark for episode 7. This is more than just character assassination. It’s character undoing and erasure.
And as a bonus, it’s not just your writers, but your own production designer, Andres Cubillan, who is making statements like this about the actors of color in interviews:
When we see these things happening so frequently and repeatedly, we seriously need ask ourselves, what kind of people are running this show and what are they allowing in the production environment that makes them believe that this is possibly acceptable. What exactly are you subjecting your actors of color to?
The antiblackness is so prominently highlighted in the season that even non-Black viewers and fans are feeling increasingly uncomfortable from the implicit and explicit bias. Some have deemed it a resentment of the black writers and their work. Others have completely tuned out and have ran back to their stack of Anne Rice novels.
The thing is there is a fundamental difference between non-Black writers who think they understand racial issues and Black writers who do understand racial issues down to their bones. But even with the best intentions of a group of non-Black writers and production crew, it isn’t enough.
It's also concerning to us, the fans and viewers, that the production and marketing team is going to Reddit of all places for fan input when it is well known that moderators there are known to silence and remove any Black and LGBTQ voices when it does not follow their agenda. It was absolutely jarring to us when we heard executive producer Mark Johnson say that the audience has no sympathy for Armand and that fans didn't like IWTV S1-2. Neither are true. “Make IWTV Great Again”? Please, no. There's a reason a lot of us are on Tumblr instead of the massive echo chamber that is Reddit.
Here’s what Tumblr thinks:
There’s only so much that a 10 photo limit of a Tumblr post can show you, but here’s a few more:
If you care to see more of such valid criticism, all you have to do is search #tvlcritical or #thevampirelestat.
You or others might say "Well if you don't like it, then don't watch it", which of course is always a choice, but that is not what we choose to do. We choose to hold you accountable for your writing choices this season and to not enable them. Which is also why our answer to Ryan Kattner's PR stunt on Instagram before the airing of episode 6 is a resounding "NO". We won't be wowed with glamourized trauma porn and we won't bend to pity filled soap boxes.
It isn't enough to hire stellar actors of color who will undoubtedly do a stellar job on screen every single time. When you made a choice to cast them, you had the responsibility to make sure that they were represented fairly. In a world of pro-capitalism where racism and antiblackness runs the consumer's world stage, we really rather this show not be part of that equation. You’ve lost the wonder that this show used to have and replaced it with something else. We want that wonder back.
We need you to do better and we are demanding that you do better in the next season. If you get a next season. Because to us, this is not a joke. Clean up your act and hire more writers who can represent these characters or we're pulling out.
This is the open letter to the IWTV writer’s room and production team I’ve been working on. You’re free to RB and share to other platforms including Twitter and Reddit where the writers are more likely to see it.
You are also free to use it for the emails to the AMC marketing team and NAACP in this call to action here:
💬 107 🔁 88 ❤️ 134 · EDIT - reposted because I had reblogged the wrong version previously with the other concerned fan still tagged. The re
edit: there is something wrong with the captcha of the contact form. I have linked another site that "Contact Us" will open into an email contact form. I'll also put this link below.
Any TV show deserves criticism; it's how writers grow and improve, but TVL deserves real fucking criticism for a lot of things. It can be really easy, however, to dip into hate mail - which will not be treated seriously by the company or show runners - so here are some tips on how to write a critical review that will be taken seriously. I recommend, even if you enjoyed this season and the finale, you write your own critical review - it doesn't need to match the examples I list below.
An email address will need to be provided for the form, so if you have/have had an AMC account, be sure to use that one. I also am unsure if there is a character limit, so try to keep the review concise and 2000 words or less.
Your goal is constructive criticism
I know, this feels like playing nice, or giving them flowers they may not deserve, but the people receiving the review will not know you participated in good faith unless you show your work. This is basic communication 101; you need to communicate that you see TVL as a work of art, and show that you did engage with the material with intent to understand. Lie, if you have to, but pure vitriol will not be taken seriously.
Before you start writing the review, identify:
1 or 2 CREATIVE decisions you liked. This could be actors, costume, set design, original content, dialogue, music, ect. These are things that make the work artistic. Map them out, and treat them seriously: for example, I really liked that the gift to walk in sunlight is a skill that can be taught, and doesn't come from age.
1 or 2 ADAPTIVE decisions you liked. This could be how they condensed something satisfyingly, an ambitious change that you think was compelling, character choices that surprised you, ambiguous details that have you thinking, or things you thought were interesting and were disappointed they did not explore more. Adaption is an art, so let them know how the art impacted you. For example: I really liked the choice to have Magnus be depicted in a music video first, and return as an aggressive and haunting muse. I think it was extremely effective, and I would have liked to see more music-video style narration.
1-2 points of strong criticism. It is easy to dogpile on a whole bunch of flaws, especially when you are irritated, upset, disappointed, or disgusted. Take a deep breath, and make sure your criticisms are substantial. I think everyone who reads this post should make one of these points reference the offensive and poorly framed racialized dialogue, and the striking and hurtful orientation of Louis as a character punished by the narrative.
The conclusion should include actions you wish to see taken to prove the creative team has considered and respected our critique. One or two requests are enough, and I will share my example at the end.
Once you have clearly identified your points, you can move onto the next step
Organize your points
Part of what makes a successful critical review is how it summarizes and analyzes a text's strengths and weaknesses, which means you won't just be writing bullet points. In academia, this would be an introduction and paragraphs based around topics abc, but we don't have to do that. These will be organized into "sections," but that's more to prevent rambling than to grade you. I'll include examples of what I would say, but don't be afraid to use your own voice and just use my words as inspiration.
I'll give you guys 3 methods you can choose between:
Concerned Viewer
If strong criticism scares you, this is a good option.
Start with a short introduction using casual language: "Hi, I am a fan of AMC's Immortal Universe, and I wanted to reach out to share some concerns I had watching the latest season of 'The Vampire Lestat.'"
Next, mention one of your negative points, and follow up with a positive point: "When watching the adaption, I was struck by the realization that ___. This disappointed me so much, because the story and themes could have added so much more to the world and characters, but I don't feel ___. I was happy that some elements made it through, such as ____. I would have loved more moments like this."
The next section should be this, but reversed. Start with a positive point, end with a negative point: "____ really stood out in their performances this season. ___ and ____ stuck with me for days after I watched. I was, however, distracted from complete enjoyment because of _____."
-- I will address the conclusion under a different header --
End with: "I would love to continue to watching The Immortal Universe franchise, however I do not feel comfortable returning to the franchise unless these criticisms are taken seriously. Thank you."
Analyst
This is a good structure if you have very precise critiques that extend beyond surface-level impact that you want to convey.
Start with a strong overview of your impressions of the season. Briefly address one good point and one bad point. You will return to these later: "Dear writers and producers of 'The Vampire Lestat,' as I have tuned into this season weekly, I found myself increasingly dismayed at ____ which damaged my enjoyment of ____ and I wanted to convey my impressions to all concerned parties, to avoid a repetition of this experience."
First section should include your weakest points. You're leading them into the criticism. It is good, also, to describe what story-telling elements you were paying attention to: "I was most excited to see the portrayal of ___ to explore the themes of ___. I was, however, distracted by ___, and found my attention torn between enjoyment and confusion."
Next section should hit your most appreciated moments, but why the flaw you chose made this feel lacking, despite your appreciation: "I was most impressed by ____ which landed with me in ways I didn't expect [fill in details]. However, the ____ were not only distracting, they completely circumvented my deep appreciation for ____ [fill in with details].
-- I will address the conclusion under a different header --
End with: "I am disappointed in the result of this project, despite how interested I was in the story being told. Unless these points are seriously addressed, please do not consider me to be a returning viewer."
Offended Viewer
If you cannot find it in yourself to be polite or logical, you are not a problem. There are ways to structure your argument to convey that emotion without having to "play nice." This will be if you can't seriously commit to the positives from above, but you should still mark things you COULD have enjoyed if the other things didn't ruin your experience.
Start with a direct address (don't name names - yet.), and then give a summary of your issues: "For those at AMC who take criticism for 'The Vampire Lestat,' I have some things that need to be said. ___ and ___ were flaws of the project that ruined my enjoyment, and taxed by emotional and intellectual well-being because I tried so hard to give this adaption a fair chance."
Next section, start with the creative/adaptive things you were looking forward to, and then transition into the moments/episode when you realized that they disappointed you. If you can name the scene, do so. Precision will get you everywhere.
Next section is when you really beat the drum. Name head writers of the episode that pissed you off, detail 2 or 3 moments that you cannot in-good-conscience accept as art, and then provide the summary of what the show seemed to tell you while depicting these things. Tell them what the story impressed on you, because a message delivered ignorantly is still as painful as a message delivered intentionally. Make sure they KNOW what you took from the story.
-- I will address the conclusion under a different header --
End with your earnest disappointment and frustration, and what guided you to this show in the first place: "I expected to enjoy this season. I wanted to respect the changes and experimental approach. I wanted to see ___ and ___, but I did not enjoy it, and my opinion of the project is forever changed because of it."
Conclusion and Action
I put this under its own header because any activist will tell you that you get the most reward out of being united, and if our demands are the same, or are similar, we are more likely to see the results we want. Giving them actions to prove they have listened will also tell the audience if it's worth it to tune into the next season.
You can shift this to be in your own words, with your own criticism. You can even choose different actions. This is just my example, to help you see exactly what I mean.
I do not expect to find myself returning to 'The Vampire Lestat,' unless I have proof that the criticisms I outlined here have been heard and understood.
First, because of the failure of the narrative framework to build a substantial critique of racism -- that included racially offensive dialogue and insults directed at Black characters -- I will not return to The Immortal Universe unless two or more Black writers are hired to share their voices in the creative space. I do not trust the creative team to further address the topic of anti-blackness without them. Second, I request a public and published acknowledgment of the creative missteps, and the insult they have given, so that I have evidence that the creative team is interested in audience feedback.
I know some people are probably not interested in returning and I get you, but I encourage you to lie anyway. Executives speak in numbers, much to my absolute disdain, so if they know they could do something to get you BACK, they will have more incentive to actually do it.
So lie: lie for the fans who want to return, for the actors who want to return, for AMC to treat us seriously, and because it's fun to give a little lie to people who won't be harmed for it. Does AMC really deserve our total truth?
You can screenshot this post, share it on other social media platforms, discord groups, group chats, whatever you need. You can do it without crediting me. Just get the word out there, so AMC's creative team is aware of the impact of their massive fumble of the season.
This isn't about personal taste, it's about solidarity and refusing to accept anti-black writing without calling it out.
You can't escape, you can't win as a Black person. Real life is miserable, fiction is miserable. The fandom that claims to be an escape for gay and trans people is virulently anti-Black. And when you say, "wow, this is miserable, is there any justice, is there anything we can enjoy, can we participate in the world?", everyone and their klan grandmother screams NO and gets mad at YOU for ruining their fun.
I guess we should've known better, right? No matter the age, no matter the genre, that there is no fun to be had in Blackness, not if you're the entertainment, not if you're the lynched and branded body. Fuck the actual fuck out of everybody.
I think the issue is that people are describing this as a bad TV season, but it's really much deeper than that. The final season of Sherlock was a bad season, the final season of Game of Thrones was a bad season. TVL / IWTV 3 is anti-Black. It is misogynistic. It has an open and glaring disdain for its Black and brown characters, and chose to be virulently anti-Black in a time of increased anti-Blackness. You are watching the corpse/ghost of a Black girl hurl racist garbage in a time where Black people are regularly being called slurs for simply existing. You are watching a Black man be branded... BRANDED! You are watching the whitewashing and babying of an unquestionably racist white man who beat his Black partner / helped lynch (yes, lynch, not stone) his Black daughter. You are seeing this done at the expense of a brown man.
Keep in mind, the characters are not making independent choices, you are not watching a documentary —you are watching the deliberate choices of an all white writers' room and a white show runner in a period of time where seventeen Black people have been lynched this year. In a time where countless Black people have been murdered in cold blood in June and July 2026 alone. This shit doesn't exist in a vacuum and pretending it does only adds more insult to injury. There is no turning your brain off in the midst of a slow genocide of Black people in america.
the writers tried so fucking hard to make us hate louis this season but all it did was reaffirm my love for him—louis dpdl is the vampire ever and nothing will ever change that. not antiblack writing, not character assassination, not smear campaigns, nothing. jacob has made him into a such a loveable, multifaceted, imperfectly perfect, iconic character that is so easy for so many people to resonate and empathize with, and that can't be taken away no matter how much they try. it's impossible to decenter louis. there would be no story without him.
You couldn't make this up. Rolin Jones 'hates writing about identity' and yet has was so desperate to adapt a book that's very introspective and all about identity. This actually explains a lot about this season fixating on the rockstar part and ignoring Lestat's backstory and most of the psychological and interpersonal dimension that make up the majority of the book. Rolin saying stuff like he didn't want to include much of Nicki stuff because they already kind of hit those beats with Louis. All the character focused scenes being presented as an exposition dump. It's all about plot mechanics and entertaintment for him. Rolin literally didn't care about the actual core of the story and was resentful for having to write about it at all
If this is what we were supposed to take away from a character like Louis why would anyone love/like him? It begs the question what are Louis’ redeeming qualities? Why do these men continue to stay with him and obsess over him?
Original post
I’ve been trying to wrap my head around this. Ultimately, I think this is all a response.
I still think Season 1 was fine. I think they knew the story they wanted to tell and approached it with open minds and excitement to adapt it. But then AMC gave them the green light to expand Louis’ arc across two seasons. Surprising but okay! And so, at least in my opinion, they did create S1 out of genuine creativity and love for the material.
But then it released and seeing how popular Loustat was, seeing people actually really like, some even love Jacob’s Louis, it made them approach S2 differently. Nobody behind the scenes was expecting for Loucob to be as loved as he is, whether people like him for himself or like him as an extension of Loustat. Even Jacob seemed to be surprised, having initially viewed his arc as a stepping stone before they’d dive into Lestat later. His shock & confusion in interviews after S2 but before they started shooting S3 was clear. He was surprised to still be brought on for in-depth interviews at all.
I wouldn’t call it lightning in a bottle. That would mean intent. It’s more like they were drinking beers in the backyard just shooting the shit before lightning freaked everybody out by zapping past the lid. While of course they didn’t plan to tell a lackluster story, I think the richness of Louis’ character was a complete accident. I think they all thought it could be perceived as good, not as fucking great.
And this is why Season 2 started us down the path of being controversial among the fanbase. And by “controversial” I genuinely mean “debated”, because people have very different opinions of it. The S2 reunion scene is heavily debated (primarily in Louis spaces) with half saying they hated it and the other half enjoying it. You have half the fanbase happy with Lestat’s apology during the trial, and half saying Santiago was right and that Lestat was too hard on himself.
Season 1 was clearer on how things were to be interpreted. While there’s definitely argument for how fans/crowds/mobs take ideas and run with them regardless of intent, nothing in Season 1 garnered as many different interpretations as the content in Season 2. I think this is because this is when the team behind the show started, seemingly, disagreeing with each other.
This is how you get “wait what was Louis’ apology to Lestat in the finale about? Was that Louis coming to terms with himself, or was that the show engaging in victim blaming?” And everyone has different POVs on it. It’s clear now, that the ambiguity behind the scene, behind quite a few scenes in S2, is because the writers themselves couldn’t agree on what they wanted them to mean.
But with all the people they’ve let go for Season 3, and the new ones they hired on, it’s obvious which side remained on-staff and the kinds of likeminded people they got to take the others’ place.
So now, in Season 3, there is no debate. There is no “hm I can see this interpretation but I can also see this interpretation….” There’s no ambiguity. This side of the team, the side that viewed Louis’ apology in S2 as Louis apologizing for ‘abusing’ Lestat, that seemed to view Louis’ charred, crumbling body apologizing to Armand as deserved punishment instead of horrific abuse, are the ones that have stayed and taken over the show.
And we KNOW debates started happening in the Season 2 writer’s room given the recent interview where Rolin briefly mentioned it, such as whether Louis asked Armand to erase his memories or if he never did. Certain things in Season 2 are controversial among fans, because the writers themselves started disagreeing on characterizations and important story beats.
So with this portion of the team let go vs the ones that were called back + those newly hired to replace the former, this is how we got Season 3. A season that is not as ambiguous as Season 2 where the writers were fist fighting when they put pen to paper. We are back to the single vision of Season 1.
Except this vision wasn’t born from heartfelt creativity and love for the material. It’s out of agreed upon resentment and shared biases. You even have the production designers of all crew members throwing in “I always liked Lestat more” unprompted when their job has NOTHING to do with character preference. Season 3 is the way it is, because these are the people who originally wanted Louis’ arc to only be compiled into a single season, and were irritated when fans kept wanting more. Whether they wanted more of Loucob or simply wanted more of Loustat as a duo.
And Rolin’s “we wrote from the gut” or “the id” and all of his sayings that they wrote instinctively lays it out that this whole mess is emotional retaliation. The writing behind Season 3 is a temper tantrum.
Not just as retaliation to Louis, but to everyone. Assad’s Armand shot through the ROOF and instantly became one of the most popular characters in S2. I’d even argue is Thee second most popular after Lestat (I’d say Daniel is the second most popular among casual viewers whereas among non-casual viewers, it’s Armand.) With DM shooting to the stars as the most popular ship among non-casual viewers. (And DM does beat out Loustat in terms of popularity when looking at the dedicated fanbase.)
But once again, this seems to have pissed That Side™️ of the creative team off after Season 2’s release. With none of them expecting Assad’s Armand to be as beloved or for DM to be as highly desired as they are. And you can see this frustration in all of Armand & DM’s “development” in Season 3.
Why Armand had less than 15 minutes total of screentime across episodes 1-6 before reducing into a maniacal villain in 3x07. Why DM’s eagerly anticipated relationship happened completely off screen, and both characters butchered so it would be intentionally unsatisfying once revealed. (And the excuse that they’re a minor / secondary relationship so they were never going to be as focused on doesn’t make sense when looking at Claudeleine. Who was still emotionally moving and well paced even in the midst of the Loumand-Dreamstat-Loustat triangle.)
The “meta” that they kept talking about in pre-S3 interviews isn’t that the writers just kept the fanbase in mind while making it, it’s that the entirety of Season 3 is a response to the fans themselves. It’s less about the actual characters that were written in Seasons 1 & 2, and comes off more as one long Twitter thread titled “My IWTV Hot Takes”
Because you also can’t say any of this was for Lestat. It’s very reminiscent to Season 2, when Lestat point blank says “I hurt Louis because I wanted to hurt him” and a portion of the fanbase shoved a pacifier in his mouth to shut him up and for years afterwards kept saying “No he didn’t mean it.” Even Samstat was reduced from a character into a figurehead.
Loucob became a punching bag, Claudlainey and Assad’s Armand were weaponized against Loucob while simultaneously reduced to punching bags too, and the writers put Samstat on the same idealized pedestal that the characters Magnus, Marius, and Gabriella are supposed to be condemned for, treating him as a concept rather than a person.
Sorry, my response turned into something else lol. But “Why would the writers write Louis this way? Why would anyone like him?” My personal opinion after really trying to understand what on earth has happened, is that no, they likely were not writing like this since S1. The season just doesn’t make sense from that POV. Everything we’re seeing right now is reactionary.
Season 1 was a story created out of actual interest, Season 2 was when the boat started to rock, and Season 3 isn’t a season at all. It’s a cokerant thread on Twitter. It’s a callout post on Tumblr. A 72-part TikTok story. It’s little more than the writers’ tantrum because fans weren’t playing with their dolls the way they wanted us to.
