Maglor was the second of the Sons of Fëanor. He had more of his mother Nerdanel’s gentle spirit than any of his brothers. Maglor was known for his poetry and singing, but in Tirion he swore the Oath of Fëanor and shared in the woes it bred.
Differences between the book and film for Interview with the Vampire:
This is honestly my favourite book and one of my favourite films growing up. When I found out it was a book and I was excited to read it and I was not disappointed. So here are some differences and why I think they were either justified or stupid to leave out. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Spoilers, obviously
1. Louis’s family change
I can understand why they’d change his brother dying to a wife and child to avoid going into his brother’s whole plot which would have taken up too much screen time to justify. However, it does explain how Claudia knows Louis was once human later in the book, whereas in the film she just knows. In the book she sees a photo of I think his sister which he keeps with him throughout the story. She does not exist in the film so it leaves a hole for how Claudia figured it out.
2. Lestat’s father
Again I can understand why they’d drop this because it has no overbearing affect on the story. It would have given Lestat more depth but I think they were going for a pure evil sort of character. Except in the film Louis mentions that the slaves know they dine from empty plates, they only did this because Lestat’s father is blind and they wanted to seem human to him. Meaning they’d pretend to eat while he did. Without his existence that makes no sense.
3. Extra characters who were cut
Babette Freniere makes sense to cut because she is more of an add on of guilt for Louis and annoyance for Lestat. The pianist boy who Lestat turns is also understandable to drop from the film because he only really turns up to die after Lestat survives his attempted murder. However this is who he means when he tells Claudia that he has found someone who would make a better vampire and that she needs a brother. The whole side plot of Babette’s brother being killed by Lestat after Louis trying to save him is pointless to the overall plot except to fuel his hatred towards Lestat and to show Lestat’s determination when it comes to who he kills.
4. Europe
In the book Louis and Claudia travel quite a bit around Europe to find other vampires only to find monsters who are similar to vampires. They eventually end up in Paris and meet the Theatre vampires. Cutting this makes sense because it would add too much to the running time.
5. Armand and Louis
In the book Armand is more involved in Louis’s decision to leave Claudia. During their first meeting they fall in love with eachother and state this many times. After Claudia dies they travel the world as companions for quite a while unlike in the film where Louis declines his offer. I can understand why they’d leave this out because of the philosophical talks and screen time their travels or explanation that they’ve travelled would have been too much. However, it changes how Louis and Lestat reunite later on. While in New Orleans Louis knows there are other vampires and begins to follow them until one to leads him to Lestat. Only to find he hasn’t left his house for years and a vampire brings him food. I preferred the book version because it showed Louis wanting to meet Lestat again. He didn’t just wonder apon him one night. He looked for him. After this Louis tells Armand that he met with Lestat and that he will not return to him. Armand tells him he could have stopped Claudia’s death and Louis already knows. Armand walks away never to be seen again. Also Madeleine is alive for much longer and is practically insane. Armand comments that it’s good she’s that way because she will protect Claudia.
6. Lestat in Paris
Unlike in the film Lestat does turn up in Paris and is there when Claudia is killed. He is actually upset by this and begs Louis to come home and tells him he didn’t think they’d kill her. He makes a deal with them that he can take Louis home unharmed only to be tricked and lied to. He cries while holding her dress. One thing I noticed was a plothole in the books plot. During The Vampire Lestat it’s said that Lestat is the only fledgling of Magnus but in the first book Lestat is taken back to New Orleans by fledgling of his creator. Makes no sense. I was delightly surprised when Lestat turned up because it showed that he was genuinely upset and actually cared for Claudia even after all she did.
7. Time change
There’s a few times that the film changes when things are set or how long it has been. Having it set in the 90s makes sense because the film was released then and not the 70s or 80s. Changing the timeline of Claudia’s time as a vampire from 70 years to 30 downplays how tormented she is by not growing up.
8. The ending
Now, I absolutely love the ending of the film and was rather disappointed when I finished the book because of how left open it was. Of course the book has sequels and the film doesn’t.(Not talking about it). I think the ending they chose is perfect for the film and the cover of Sympathy for the Devil is suits it so well
If I missed any please say. Thank you reading my rambles 😁
A tryptich of contemplative sketches from Starcon: The Sun, The Moon, The Truth.
The Moon – What have I done? What for? What should I do? The Sun – It was you. It is your duty. If not you, who? The Truth. There is no duty. Nobody is at fault.
Moonlit Spires 