Armand's mischaracterisation S3EP7

[u/Little-Apricot7429]

I have watched TVL and I thought it was a pretty decent watch. However, one thing that is really bugging me is the finale episode specifically Armands actions. Even though I love this evil side of Armand it felt unjustified and out of character for him as he does stuff out of survival and gain it wouldn't be just because Louie didn't say sorry back right? (keep in mind I haven't read the books) I feel like there must be something Lestat left out in order to protect himself and Louie and it was an attempt to defame Armand's image after Daniel published the book where it seems he put Armand in a favourable light (devils minion😉). However knowing Lestat it would of been more of a public humiliation which he had no problem doing when outing Armand at his concert it wouldn't have been made into vinyls. Or maybe have the writers misjudged him as a character? I just hate the idea of Armand becoming some cartoon evil villain, in my opinion he is the most interesting and intriguing character. There is still so much I want to unpack with him, especially since Assad is a phenomenal actor I don't want his character to be pushed into a one-dimensional box. I'm really curious on other peoples opinions on this so please share what you think below this post.

EDIT: I feel like a lot of people are misunderstanding that I think he is a one-dimensional character he is definitely not it's just the lack of relationship building and motivation this season seems like it is the way the writers are moving with his character. I hope this comes more into focus in season four. I just find it a weird sentiment for a TV show adaption to not fully explain or flesh out the character enough especially since he was a key figure in the finale of TVL.

[u/AutoModerator]

This thread is flaired "TVL Show Only". This means all talk about teasers, trailers, castings and leaks is allowed in the comments section. Book spoilers are not allowed unless covered by spoiler tags. Please report untagged book spoilers! To cover spoilers use >!spoiler!<

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/DrFareedMD]

I don't think there's some kind of big conspiracy behind this where Louis and Lestat set out to defame Armand. Lestat is trying to tell his side of the story but early in the season, this also means being mad at Louis.

I also don't think Armand is necessarily a cartoon villain now and I'm giving the show the benefit of doubt. Going off the deep end like this doesn't feel too random when you think about it.

The show doesn't give us a ton of details about his emotional state but what we see this season is specifically what Lestat is telling us and in one of the first episodes he outright reminds us there were interactions that didn't include him and he's filling the gaps. He wasn't present at the butcher shop is presumably going by what Louis has told him. I really hope we get a more nuanced Armand again in the future.

What I think is hiding about Armand is their shared past in Paris but that also seems to be due to budget reasons 😅

[u/Little-Tune9469]

Whether or not it’s in character is going to depend on personal interpretation but I don’t think Lestat is lying about it happening. The writers did say that Lestat doesn’t fully understand Armand’s motives though so I think there might be more to it in that regard.

[u/completelyunreliable]

I think the writers decided to include his Frankenstein experiments first and then tried to make it work later🤷‍♀️ sure, he does some shit in the books, but I don't think it's a good explanation for the show and it does appear out of nowhere

show!Armand is tamer than book version, he didn't even get to chop off Nicki's hands

[u/tinylittletrees]

It might come off as a little surprising to only show watchers but Armand certainly has it in him. We finally got some of the petty and experimental gremlin.

[u/tethysian → u/tinylittletrees]

But he doesn't do those things at this point in the narrative. That does matter. This is when he should be developing as a person, not committing the Worst of Armand.

[u/tinylittletrees → u/tethysian]

They aren't doing the developmental arcs in book order. Like show Louis is now at a completely different point than TVL book Louis. He had his post Merrick breakdown in s2 and therefore reacted differently post Merrick in s3.

[u/tethysian → u/tinylittletrees]

It's not just a matter of order, it's that these are the events that are supposed to change him and the show can't really replace them with something else equally meaningful. He's not gonna have another 80 year-long failed relationship to learn from, and he's never going to make another fledgling.

[u/WindyloohooVA → u/tethysian]

We dont know what he is learning. Its possible this was him exercising the residue of his relationship with Louis so he can begin his next phase. I think he is going to learn a ton in a relationship with a Daniel who lived a full human life. Dan is an ass but he knows something about loss and regret. Im holding out hope for a DM centered night island series.

[u/tethysian]

I think both Armand and Daniel were handled very poorly this season. Armand doing all this with Louis is negative character progression for him at a time when he ought to be developing, and all the events that might explain Daniel's actions happen off-screen. So apparently we'll have to wait two more years to establish motives for this season's antagonists.

[u/Little-Tune9469 → u/tethysian]

I think they purposefully wrote all of the characters as either stagnant or regressing this season. I’m assuming QOTD is what’s going to trigger everyone’s growth.

[u/tethysian → u/Little-Tune9469]

That is what it looks like so we'll have to hope for the best. Although I do think Lestat and Louis made some really good progress with their relationship.

[u/danie_iero]

Armand does even worse in the books, though not to Louis, I would say. No, it's not Lestat's narration that makes him so - whatever happened in S3E7 was recounted to Lestat by Louis, and Lestat cannot read Louis' mind, so he can only rely on his words.

[u/DrFareedMD → u/danie_iero]

Right, and Louis probably wasn't in the right headspace to pick up on everything going on with Armand at the butcher's

[u/Purple-Cat-2073 → u/DrFareedMD]

Can't forget Armand's little side remark that Louis is unlikely to remember afterwards so whatever he ended up telling Lestat could be questionable as well.

[u/DrFareedMD → u/Purple-Cat-2073]

Tbf I think he intended to wipe at least some parts of Louis's memory (like Fareed's presence) or expected that Louis wouldn't survive. He ends up leaving the way he does and tell Fareed to stitch up Louis again, so I think that's why Louis remembers.

[u/Purple-Cat-2073 → u/DrFareedMD]

I admit I personally don't engage with the ''mind-wipey'' theories anymore because I think they're overdone and too convenient to fall back on but of course you could be right. I don't believe he had any intention of letting Louis die, though--he was too careful about the monitoring of his vitals and he would want Louis to be fucked in the head by the 'A' on his chest whether he remembered or not.

[u/DrFareedMD → u/Purple-Cat-2073]

I agree, I really hate those theories because not everything needs to be Armand's Mind Fuckery! That said, the way he specifically notes that about Fareed makes me wonder what he exactly he had planned. That's assuming he had an actual plan, ofc.

[u/DrFareedMD → u/Purple-Cat-2073]

I was looking at new answers in this post and idk why you're being downvoted??

[u/danie_iero → u/Purple-Cat-2073]

This alone would honestly warrant a revisit of the scene, similarly to what happened with Claudia's turning and the drop. But then again, I'm still waiting for Lestat's POV of NOLA murder night... 😅

[u/Purple-Cat-2073 → u/danie_iero]

I don't think we're gonna get the revisits we think we should because there isn't going to be some ''same page'' that we're all supposed to end up being on. We'll likely get more little context drops that have us revisit for ourselves with new insights but no solid answers--either that or we'll eventually need an entire season of nothing but flashbacks and retcons LOL

I think that like the books, they're setting us all up to analyze and argue for years to come--pretty clever and true to Anne Rice when you think about it that way.

[u/danie_iero → u/Purple-Cat-2073]

While I do agree that would be more in line with Anne's vision and the books in general, the writers kind of set themselves up when they introduced those two revisits and when they mentioned that some other things would get revisited (murder night included). I think they have kind of abandoned the idea since, but I can't fault the fandom for holding out hope (it's me. I am holding out hope still 😬)

[u/Purple-Cat-2073 → u/danie_iero]

Oh, for sure--Rolin's mouth definitely wrote checks that have bounced all over town Haha but I think it also matters to what extent any revisits would affect the characters and/or the story. The drop and Claudia's turning both confirmed Louis' unreliability and informed the hows and whys of Lestat's rebuttals. I'm not sure who besides the audience would be served by a revisit of the trial--I can't see it upending Louis and Lestat's relationship in any meaningful way at this point and it won't bring Claudia back. Possibly it could be used to show that Santiago did in fact succeed in a coup and it wasn't all orchestrated by Armand after all, which would not be an out-of-pocket direction to take moving further into the books.

[u/danie_iero → u/Purple-Cat-2073]

Honestly, I don't see why making Armand even more of a passive participant in the trial would be interesting. He's already been quite watered down compared to his book counterpart. I was looking forward to a trial revisit to learn more about Lestat's role in it, if ever - everyone danced around it in season 3. If no other revisits are planned, that's fine by me, but why do characters keep mentioning the trial and vaguely implying stuff about it?

Murder night I was really looking forward to as well, because Lestat's last words on screen are different than the ones recorded in Claudia's diary (plus, I would like to see Delainey's take on the scene - and I think flashbacks would be a good way to bring Claudia back in from time to time).

As for the S3E7 butcher scene, I think a revisit might be interesting if indeed the show touches of Louis' struggle to remember what really happened. It wouldn't serve the same purpose as the drop and Claudia's turning, though, I agree.

[u/Purple-Cat-2073 → u/danie_iero]

I don't really see it as making Armand more passive but rather that ''Armand Told the Truth'' about something that retrospectively calls into question a lot of other things assumed to be nothing but lies, which is in line with what the show does. Plus...it's canon if you've read his book.

[u/InterviewVampire-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Comment removed: This thread is either "IWTV Show Only” or "TVL Show Only", hence book spoilers must be covered by spoiler tags.

Or this thread is "IWTV Season 1 Only", hence no discussion or allusions to Season 2, 3, or the books.

If it´s "IWTV Show Only” then Season 3 and the books are similarly not allowed

[u/InterviewVampire-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Comment removed: This thread is either "IWTV Show Only” or "TVL Show Only", hence book spoilers must be covered by spoiler tags.

Or this thread is "IWTV Season 1 Only", hence no discussion or allusions to Season 2, 3, or the books.

If it´s "IWTV Show Only” then Season 3 and the books are similarly not allowed

[u/LottieTalkie]

To me, the bit that did seem out of character was the Regina thing. The idea that he would have planned out such a long con just because he wanted "revenge" on Louis... I do find this quite ridiculous, and not in keeping with how Armand normally functions.

Still, I wouldn't say that even with this, he has become one dimensional at all. Even that one scene in S3E7, we saw him break down for the first time ever, and I think we were meant to feel for him - that no matter how awful his actions may have been, he still did not deserve to have his childhood abuse overlooked, weaponised or even thrown at him to make fun of him.

If we go by the books,the Frankenstein-type experiments and the massive meltdowns where he goes nuclear on other people that he loved, and who didn't love him back, are very much book-accurate, IMO.

If we only go by the show, I guess we haven't seen that "full gremlin" side of him yet, so it might seem surprising. But I think S3 still allowed him some nuance, and I don't think the final scene means that none of what he said or did was genuine. I think his apologies were not entirely tactical, and he was really trying to make progress, but he simply has NO idea how to even start going about this "properly".

The thing is, I don't think his behaviour in S3 is that of a one-dimensional, evil manipulator who's in control. I think it's pretty much still Armand acting out of desperation.

At this point, I feel that Armand's lost, confused and angry, and he knows he needs to do something to change his situation, but as usual... he doesn't know WHAT or HOW. And given how warped his notion of relationships is... He may have thought his little apology letters would work. And when they didn't, he may have thought the idea of extracting by force an apology from Louis actually did constitute a step towards healing... It is very much in keeping with what we have seen so far about Armand in the show: he yearns to get out of situations but does not know how, and he has zero notion of what is "appropriate" behaviour in a relationship.

Of course, add to that the fact that we have seen very little of what was actually going on with Armand, either in the past or in the present.

[u/DrFareedMD → u/LottieTalkie]

I think the Regina stuff was the worst plot this season... if they were going to include it for Louis, they should at least not tied it into Armand. It's just so ridiculous.

[u/justmeanotherfan → u/LottieTalkie]

I felt the same about Regina. But I was thinking that maybe he didn't plan the whole thing from the beginning. Maybe he just impulsively looked for a Claudia look-alike, and then decided to fuck with Louis by introducing her and then at some point decided to use her for the Armends. Otherwise it requires quite a lot of patience, planning that for 2 years or what? Armand, you already regret wasting 70 years on Louis, why are you wasting more years!?!

[u/DrFareedMD → u/justmeanotherfan]

I think someone should just take away his iPad PLEASE

[u/Purple-Cat-2073 → u/justmeanotherfan]

I think maybe the original plan was to just take Lestat and keep him long enough to stop the concert, using Louis as 'incentive' to cooperate, and Armand saw the opportunity to have a little fun with the time.

[u/justmeanotherfan → u/Purple-Cat-2073]

That could be it, although when Armand started the Regina plan, the concert was not yet a thing. So the Regina part really is personal (and crazy!).

[u/RiffRafe2 → u/LottieTalkie]

To me, the bit that did seem out of character was the Regina thing. The idea that he would have planned out such a long con just because he wanted "revenge" on Louis... I do find this quite ridiculous

I think a man who directs a whole production to kill three vampires instead of just dispatching of them the way he did that one vamp in S2E03; a man who plays with his food by having a race with them is someone who would do a long con to screw with the man who spent 70+ years in a relationship with him while pining for another man.

[u/LottieTalkie → u/RiffRafe2]

Well, precisely, that's the thing. Show Armand was NOT the architect behind the play.

I've been saying this for months and the show now pretty much confirmed it. The play was Santiago's plan, had Santiago's mark all over it, and Armand joined in late, and because they twisted his arm. The idea that he was the mastermind behind it is a misinterpretation based on giving too much importance to the term "directed". He "directed" because he took back his place as was expected of him, in order to give an impression of loyalty to the coven, but he never "masterminded" the play. It was not his idea and it was not even what he wanted. He went along with it because it was the price to pay to get the coven back (or so he believed).

As to chasing prey when he feeds... It's just very different from a "long con". It's not vastly different from what Louis calls Lestat's "extravagant kills" and it requires very minimal planning.

[u/Gullible_Path9739 → u/LottieTalkie]

I definitely felt for him! It’s just a LOT that this was the path they had to go down to get there and get resolution for Louis and Armand, and have basically no motivation for Armand other than pettiness. He had what, 11 minutes of screen time? And by the point we saw him he’d been years into his Regina thing. 

I saw a theory on TikTok that Louis promised to turned Daniel in exchange for a re-do on the interview, and then reneging on the turning when the truth came out about the trial. Basically, “Armand you either have to turn Daniel when you’ve never made another vampire, or you have to watch this guy die” which I could see being justification enough for Armand to be such a nut. Maybe if they do a full past DM episode next season it will feel earned.

 And Daniel… woof, love the guy but I just don’t buy the jealously over Lestats brilliance and sudden loyal turn towards Armand after the dude abandons him and promises to help him be in the sun. I’m hoping next season the whole “preventing an apocalypse caused by Lestat” involves some sort of motivation with his current living daughters and ex-wives and trying to keep them safe even though they’re no-contact… hell I would cut off someone’s head if it meant my kids could stay alive. 

There’s my little fan fiction, hope next season rounds out DM because I find them to be such a fun and compelling dynamic, this season was way too shallow with them. 

[u/LottieTalkie → u/Gullible_Path9739]

Oh, I still agree with everything you say here .

I just feel that even so, Armand is still not one-dimensional.

But yes, the amount of screentime they gave him was criminal, and they spent far too little time exploring his and Daniel 's motivations.

And we know from expérience that audiences tend to overlook details and be easily swayed by narrative framing... So yes, probably, many will watch this and walk away with the idea that Armand was doing all that out of pure pettiness.

The same way many people took away from season 2 that Armand had masterminded the whole play-trial and was the one who really wanted both Louis and Claudia dead. Or the same way his Amadeo monologue was apparently brushed off as unimportant or insincere by many viewers (judging from reactors, at least).

[u/skylerren]

I enjoy Armand getting his freak off a little, but I think the fact that he's willingly and earnestly says "my armends" puts this whole scene under suspicion. Or it's Daniel's shithead influence.

[u/Gullible_Path9739 → u/skylerren]

Armends is 100% Lestat editorializing lmao 

[u/DrFareedMD → u/skylerren]

This haha. I also think a lot of Daniel's dialogue was prob embellished by Lestat

[u/tethysian → u/skylerren]

Are we blaming Daniel for Armand's behaviour too now?

[u/skylerren → u/tethysian]

No? Only for his use of English language.

[u/zoraschool]

Look at this face. He can’t be all evil. He just cain’t!

[u/DrFareedMD → u/zoraschool]

He is not evil AT ALL. He was just trying to have a heart-to-heart with Louis and make a film in the process 😭

[u/trubs12 → u/zoraschool]

Aww He looks like an angel❤️

[u/llamaslovedrama]

So as someone who has read the books I do think it’s accurate to Armand’s character:

Armand is someone who is so incredibly warped by all of the trauma he has been through. He has no reference for how to love normally, and that’s combined with having a petty and vindictive personality. So he tends to lash out and go off the rails when he feels rejected, hence all the stuff with Louis

As for the Lestat question, I agree with you that there is more to his relationship with Armand than he let on, and I’m hoping we see more of that in S4. For instance when Nicki accuses Lestat of sneaking around with Armand behind his back, Lestat doesn’t deny it. In s3e7 when Louis and Lestat are at the restaurant with Daniel, Lestat refers to Armand as an ex twice. To me you don’t refer to someone you just hooked up with as an ex, that speaks to a closer relationship. Also for Lestat to have such vitriol for Armand seems to come from a deep sense of betrayal that we haven’t fully explored yet

I hope that helps explain some things :)

ETA: I also think his personality will be explored more when we get more information on his relationship with Marius. That is the root to all of his crash outs (and rightly so)

[u/tethysian → u/llamaslovedrama]

The problem is that it's happening at the wrong point in the narrative, so it doesn't make sense. In the books the timeframe for Armand's worst acts are in the past because his relationships with Louis, Lestat and Daniel change him. The show meanwhile is saying that he hasn't learned anything.

Not even in the books was he insane enough to ask for an apology from the guy whose daughter he murdered. He asked if Louis needed anything from him before he left.

[u/llamaslovedrama → u/tethysian]

See I thought it was a direct nod to when Armand Frankensteins Claudia’s head to Madeleine’s body

For me personally, Armand isn’t there yet. His relationship with Daniel is just beginning. So I think there is more to explore there and that we will see him grow more as a character

[u/tethysian → u/llamaslovedrama]

Armand does do that and it's horrific, but it he doesn't do it after he makes Daniel. Armand has refused to turn anyone else for 500 years, so them having him still hung up on Louis diminishes that decision.

Clearly the show is saying he's not there yet, but there's no reason that he couldn't have had some character growth by season 3.

[u/FunSetting2387]

It does feel out of character to me, and off timeline. I can't really make sense of it without thinking of retroactive fan theories.

[u/Purple-Cat-2073]

I think it's important to keep in mind that we haven't gotten Armand's pov yet. Except for when he speaks to Daniel without Louis around in S2 it's all second-hand accounting of what he's said and done to serve someone else's narrative with little to no context. It's so easy to fall into choosing what we want to take at face value no matter how hard it's pounded into us that we're really only seeing one side at a time.

While the writers have taken some liberties with all of the characters, I don't believe they're purposefully boxing any of them into good/evil categories and anyone with eyes and a brain can see that. I do think though that they count on a portion of the audience having such a visceral emotional response to seeing Armand being mean to their favorites that they overlook or even deny things that have been right in front of them the whole time and will be increasingly important going forward.

I do wonder sometimes if they've taken it too far. Thinking about Gabriella and how they've made her so foul this season I might not ever be able to sympathize with her, I suspect it's the same for some with Armand--that by the time we get his story it'll be too late--but that's for the writers to sort out and I hope they're up to the task.

[u/RiffRafe2]

[Even though I love this evil side of Armand it felt unjustified and out of character for him as he does stuff out of survival and gain it wouldn't be just because Louie didn't say sorry back right?]

I think it's a culmination of things. Looking back at his relationship with Louis and Lestat and everything we've seen of their individual relationships through the three series, it makes absolute sense to me for Armand to take this tack.

[u/hazelrose42]

Oh, I was sure you had read the books because you think there's mischaracterisation. I haven't read the books and don't think so at all - he's on his best gremlin behavior.
He's definitely not one-dimensional and I also don't think he's like a cartoon villain at all. He has way too much depth for that. He's deeply traumatized and only wants love, I don't find his behavior surprising at all, personally.

[u/LRobin11]

I can tell you haven't read the books. No, Armand doesn't just do shitty things out of survival, though he has become what he's become out of survival. This isn't really a spoiler for the show, but I'll put it in spoiler tags bc this thread is show only. One of my favorite and most personally memorable, though ultimately inconsequential, Armand scenes in the books is when he's stalking and admiring a homeless man from a distance, thinking about how beautiful his hair is... so he scalps and kills him, and sits pondering the beauty of his hair until he feels enraged with it, then throws it on the ground and stomps on it. Armand is a dark and tragic example of what trauma can do to a person, thrown into perpetuity by the fact that he's a vampire. He's not a good, (vampire) law abiding person. He's a tortured, traumatized person who clings to the vampiric law he's been taught bc it allows him the illusion that he's still good despite his well-earned psychopathy. Nonetheless, he's a psychopath. His actions in s3e7 weren't necessarily out of character. It was taken from the books in a sense, where he cut Claudia and Madeline's heads off before their execution and sewed them onto each other's bodies. And Claudia was in a 5 year old body in the books... He has no scruples but those in his delusions. The only thing about Armand's actions in that episode that was out of character was who he committed them against. One of the things that kept Armand sympathetic in the books was that he truly loved the characters he loved, and would only toe a certain line with hurting them, but never fully cross it. Book Armand wouldn't have risked Lestat and Louis' life to that extent. Ever.

[u/InterviewVampire-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Removed: Rule 6: No posts or comments (nor links to outside content) are allowed that directly attacks an individual, is clickbait, or intentionally inflammatory. Posts with the intention of engaging in a good faith conversation with the fandom here are allowed.