The MMM...poison thread. (A stupid question)
Azaleea
Tom Goulter wrote:
>
><<snippety-snip-snip>>
> Ooookay, as far as I can recall, in the book it *wasn't* the "dead blood"
> thing, it was the poison. Yeah, sure, because when Anne herself saw the movie,
> one of her questions was, "why did dead blood hurt Lestat?"... So Lestat was
> poisoned not by the blood, but by poison *in* the blood, which Claudia ensured
> was of a tasteless, undetectable variety.
>
> - Tom, who just doesn't like apples, alive, dead *or* poisoned
> tgo...@actrix.gen.nz IRC: JimmyJake or Mariachi
> <one final snip>
Hmn... so it was the absinthe and laudanum that hurt him? Vampires are
actually affected by that? But they are not actually affected by, for
instance, a virus in the blood of a human victim, are they? I still
don't quite understand, being a little slow :)
Azaleea.
Azaleea
Following the thread about how Lestat failed to perceive Claudia's
scheme with the poisoned boys...
This is perhaps a stupid question but it has been bothering me for a
while and I wish someone would clarify it for me (too lazy to go back to
the books and research on my own). But anyway, here goes:
What exactly happens to vampires when they drink "dead blood" and why
can't they? Also, even if Lestat didn't notice that the boys were dead,
did he really drink that much from them to be thus affected? I mean, I'm
sure he stopped as soon as he realized, so why would it influence him in
such a drastic way? (weird analogy follows :) If you, let's say, pick up
a fruit that you think is in good condition, and proceed to eat it,
realizing as you bite into it that it's really overripe and spoiled...
can't you just throw it away at that point without being affected?
Thanks for reading this. I appreciate any responses.
Azaleea.
Tom Goulter
Ooookay, as far as I can recall, in the book it *wasn't* the "dead blood"
thing, it was the poison. Yeah, sure, because when Anne herself saw the movie,
one of her questions was, "why did dead blood hurt Lestat?"... So Lestat was
poisoned not by the blood, but by poison *in* the blood, which Claudia ensured
was of a tasteless, undetectable variety.
- Tom, who just doesn't like apples, alive, dead *or* poisoned
tgo...@actrix.gen.nz IRC: JimmyJake or Mariachi
"Maybe none of us really changes over time; we only become more
fully what we are."
- The Vampire Lestat
"You're an alien sex fiend, you're an alien sex fiend, and you
go la la lalala la la lalala la la lalalalaa..."
- Garbage
Carlos Aguero sanz
But when Lestat was training Louis, he told him to stop drinking when the
heart stopped otherwise it would make him sick - he even slapped Louis to
make sure that he stopped.
In the film Claudia mentioned that although the Laudanum killed the twins
it kept their blood warm. She also told Lestat that they were drunk on
cherry brandy so he would have expected their blood to taste of something.
It wasn't so much what was in the blood, Lestat called for his coffin
where he could recover, this is when Claudia slashed him open as he was
weak.
If I'm wrong, let me know.
Charlie aka seawolfe@cix
The Brat Queen
On Sun, 20 Oct 1996, Azaleea wrote:
> Following the thread about how Lestat failed to perceive Claudia's
> scheme with the poisoned boys...
> This is perhaps a stupid question but it has been bothering me for a
> while and I wish someone would clarify it for me (too lazy to go back to
> the books and research on my own). But anyway, here goes:
> What exactly happens to vampires when they drink "dead blood" and why
> can't they? Also, even if Lestat didn't notice that the boys were dead,
It's not a stupid question. It's a question brought about by the fact
that the move decided to go off on its own as far as VampChron canon goes
for no apparent or logical reason.
In IWTV, it wasn't dead blood that got to Stat, it was the fact that the
boys had absinthe and laudinum in their blood which was a powerful enough
cocktail to knock Stat for a loop and give Claudia the chance to do the
dirty deed, as it were. Vamps, as shown by an earlier scene where Lestat
was drunk from having drunk the blood of mortals with a high alcohol level
of their own, are affected by whatever narcotic/stimulant/etc. is in their
victim's blood.
In the movie, however, they changed this to "Never drink from the dead.",
again for no apparent reason. In TVL, there *is* a scene of Stat drinking
"dead blood" and he mainly says that it was pretty much nasty and not
something he'd care to start as a hobby, but it didn't destroy him either,
just made him feel ill.
"You must stop before the heart stops." (can you tell I've memorized this
film? <g>) is not so much because of the "dead blood" but because of the
danger that the dead will drag you down with them (although this is
possibly a vampire urban myth since there is no mention of this actually
happening to a vampire, only that it's possible). Louis gets knocked for
a loop early on in IWTV when he gets close to drinking until the heart
stops, however Lestat is able to do it with very little problems early on
in his vampire existance.
My guess is that when they made the movie, they felt it was easier to say
that dead blood was harmful to vampires, than to try to explain why a
dying victim could so affect a vampire like it did Louis in ITWV. AFter
all, it's easy to understand something like that when reading it in a book
and seeing how much of the victim's soul the vampire can feel, but that
would have been very hard to convey in a movie where no such intimacy was
indicated.
> did he really drink that much from them to be thus affected? I mean, I'm
> sure he stopped as soon as he realized, so why would it influence him in
> such a drastic way? (weird analogy follows :) If you, let's say, pick up
> a fruit that you think is in good condition, and proceed to eat it,
> realizing as you bite into it that it's really overripe and spoiled...
> can't you just throw it away at that point without being affected?
As can happen with any liquor, Stat drank too fast to tell how strong it
was (or, in his case, that there was any in the blood at all) until it was
knocking him flat on his... er, feet ;)
Laura Ann (aka Mrs. Wicked One)
----
"There is no need for you to worry about squirrels; belive me, they are
not worrying about *you*." --Dave Barry
--**--
The Anne Rice and alt.books.anne-rice FAQs can be found at:
http://www.eskimo.com/~talset & http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/2591
Or e-mail me and ask nicely =)
Rafa
Tom Goulter <tgo...@actrix.gen.nz> wrote in article
<326B4F...@actrix.gen.nz>...
> Ooookay, as far as I can recall, in the book it *wasn't* the "dead
blood"
> thing, it was the poison. Yeah, sure, because when Anne herself saw the
movie,
> one of her questions was, "why did dead blood hurt Lestat?"... So Lestat
was
> poisoned not by the blood, but by poison *in* the blood, which Claudia
ensured
> was of a tasteless, undetectable variety.
Mmmm.... that's not the impression I got when I read the book. I alway
believed that Claudia used the poison to kill the boys while keeping the
blood warm, so Lestat wouldn't notice they were dead. As far as I
remember, dead blood kills the vampire that are not strong enough to drain
the victim to death.
Of course, this notion from the book was shattered when in the movie Lestat
and Louis are drinking from the prostitute in the bar, and Louis says
something like:
Louis: I will not kill her
Lestat: don't worry, I did that for you... (or somthing like that).
Rafa Ortega
MARK ROSS
let's put it this way...it's the best way I can think as to why it
affected Lestat so much. If you were bitten by a cobra, there is not a
lot of venom that actually gets into your bloodstream. However, it can
still kill you and does affect you right away. That is how I try to look
at the blood Lestat drank. It was a venom that poisoned him. Even though
it was just a little bit, it was enough. That is the best I can think of.
Plus think of the fact that it was the movie. Hollywood does a lot of
things like that just to make it more interesting. In the books, dead
blood was not as big of an issue. It just made them feel sick.
--Drakain
Belial
Azaleea wrote:
>
> Following the thread about how Lestat failed to perceive Claudia's
> scheme with the poisoned boys...
> This is perhaps a stupid question but it has been bothering me for a
> while and I wish someone would clarify it for me (too lazy to go back to
> the books and research on my own). But anyway, here goes:
> What exactly happens to vampires when they drink "dead blood" and why
> can't they? Also, even if Lestat didn't notice that the boys were dead,
> sure he stopped as soon as he realized, so why would it influence him in
> such a drastic way? (weird analogy follows :) If you, let's say, pick up
> a fruit that you think is in good condition, and proceed to eat it,
> realizing as you bite into it that it's really overripe and spoiled...
> can't you just throw it away at that point without being affected?
> Azaleea.
In TVL didn't Lestat drink dead blood in the TDV in Paris because Armand
locked him in a room with a corpse, and it didn't cause him to go into a
coma or anything, he just felt awful.
mvmi...@gmail.com
look for katherine ramsland vampire companion
