Horror films have been a staple of the movie industry since its earliest days. Why have horror films – particularly those featuring vampires, werewolves, and other supernatural creatures – been so popular with audiences over the years? And how did the early vampire films Nosferatu (1924) and Dracula (1931) influence the portrayal of vampires (and vampire hunters) in modern media? You should refer to the Everything Vampire Book to help support your answer.
Part 1
ReplyDeleteHorror films incorporating supernatural creatures have this sometimes-surprising ability to attract audiences. Why would something meant to cause fear be so attractive? Part of it is simply because they offer a form of escapism from everyday life. These supernatural creatures are not normal and thus not seen during peoples day-to-day lives. Movies themselves were/are often designed to create different worlds the audience can enter and allows them to forget about their worries or problems. While having escapist elements, some of these films (especially vampire films) are still able “to reflect . . .what is occurring in society during various eras,” (Karg 175) allowing audiences to still have a meaningful connection to, or feel part of the story.
Perhaps the better reason why this genre is popular is because there are “innate human curiosities” (Karg 174) surrounding the supernatural. Humans are simply curious and there is little more curious then stories built by myths, legends, and folklore. Stories deemed fiction by society but cause people to wonder if real or cause them to wish to be real. People want to know more about these creatures and see how they change with each telling, for each film brings something new to the table and causes a continuous evolution. It would be difficult not to be curious about creatures that already have mysterious origins and then are always changing.
When looking at vampire films, there are two that standout as capturing peoples curiosity and creating this love/demand for vampires, both being based on the Dracula novel. What is interesting is, according to the Everything Vampire Book, there were at least 36 vampire-related films before Nosferatu (1922) was released. It makes one wonder what made this film memorable compared to the earlier films. I remember seeing Nosferatu a few years ago and the one word that comes to mind is creepy. In its simplicity it gained this ability to cause a degree of fear not expected. This partially comes from the restricted motions of Count Orlock, from way he ‘glides’ and the “unblinking” (Karg 177) eyes. Then there is Dracula (1931), which explores the more refined Count Dracula who is smooth with his words and able to mesmerize (Karg 175) the audience.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteBoth of these films have had their impact on modern vampires with, arguably, Dracula having a greater impact. This is because Bela Lugosi played the “pallor vampire” (Karg 190), the vampire who can be a gentleman and has mentioned above has the ability to mesmerize people. Some modern day examples of this can be the vampires in True Blood and in Interview with a Vampire. They may not all be gentlemen but they are ‘handsome’ and have the innate power to draw people in. This feature is consistently seen in vampire media and can be traced to before Dracula to Lord Ruthven in The Vampyre. It is the human appearance that is passed down and the limited changes that the vampire can undergo, the most prominent being the extension of the canine teeth, or teeth in general since some modern interpretations have changed which teeth change length. Nosferatu has also affected the modern vampire, but not to the extent of Dracula. Lord Orlock had a “ratlike appearance” (Karg 177) and doesn’t have the “social graces” (Karg 178) now associated with vampires. However, there are still modern vampires who toe the line between man and monster. Seldom are there vampires that entirely look like monsters but instead have the capability to turn into them. In From Dusk till Dawn the vampires look normal and then transform into the more Nosferatu vampire. This ability is also seen in many other films and/or shows.
In terms of the vampire hunter, neither film seems to have had a major impact on modern hunters, except for maybe the amount of knowledge possessed. It would seem that Peter Cushing’s portrayal of Van Helsing in later films had more of an impact than either of these films did on the vampire hunter. This is because Cushing brought a “physical presence” (Karg 191) to the hunter and today there are more active hunters, such as Buffy and Blade. It is no longer the doctor who gives advice but instead a person who is more physically involved in the slaying of vampires.
Nosferatu and Dracula have both affected the modern vampire and will continue to do so with future interpretations.
Beginning as early as the 1800s, vampires have intrigued spectators (Chapter 14). According to Barb Karg’s The Everything Vampire Book, it’s no surprise that the captivating vampire character made its way onto the big screen. The success of the horror genre is also a no-brainer as Karg urges that it, “prey[s] upon the innate human curiosities surrounding all things that shock, creep, scream, howl, bite, vanish, fly, mutate, and generally move to scare the knickers off us” (Chapter 14). Horror films, those including vampires and those not, have lured audiences since the creation of the movie industry. This genre has the ability to capture the interest of all types of audiences, leaving viewers frightened yet quenching for more. However, out of all the creepy characters of the horror genre, Karg claims that, “only the vampire has proven throughout each decade that its on-screen presence truly is immortal” (Chapter 14).
ReplyDeleteBram Stoker’s original depiction of Dracula not only set the stage for the portrayal of vampires in film, but also ignited the “franchise of entertainment” surrounding vampires in the media (Chapter 14). Karg points out that stage plays of Dracula were particularly essential in establishing the hallmark qualities of the vampire that are still seen on screen today (Chapter 14). However, film renditions of Dracula, emphasizing his appearance, led to the evolution of the classic vampire to the modern day bloodsucker (Chapter 14). Early horror film productions like the Hammer Films “capitalized on vampirism in all its red-blooded glory” (Chapter 14). These films also brought horror to life, appearing in color (Chapter 14). Karg stresses that Deane and Balderston’s version of Dracula produced the “screen-savvy vampire we know today, one that audiences across the decades can relate to” (Chapter 14). In their version, Dracula was shown as a normal human, functioning in daily life, despite his blood-sucking truth (Chapter 14). This adaptation of the classic Dracula appears across current films like the Twilight Saga and television shows likes The Vampire Diaries and True Blood. In each of these storylines, the vampire characters look seemingly human, as they appear to behave normally to the rest of society.
Horror films have arguably stood the test of time more so than any other genre (Chapter 14). The most notable vampire film in history, Nosferatu, was truly among one of the only silent films not to get lost in the havoc of time (Chapter 14). Similarly, Stoker’s Dracula gained more popularity in film than any other work of literature translated to on-screen media (Chapter 14).
Illustrious horror film characters throughout history have also helped drive the horror genre forward (Chapter 15). Bela Lugosi and Christopher Lee are but a few characters who have helped sustain the horror film image throughout history (Chapter 15). Their iconic spirits created vampire legacies that continue to seep through current horror films.
It is clear that without the influence of classic horror literature and silent films, the abundance, popularity and demand for vampires in films would simply not exist. Indeed, Stoker’s Dracula allowed the horror genre to venture into new territory, characters and mixed-genres, while keeping with the essence of early vampire films. Without the trial and error from production companies like Hammer Film Productions Ltd. as well as numerous editions and renderings of Stoker’s Dracula, the horror film genre of today would not be what it is.
Horror films focus merely on the unknown, and there is no doubt that people are intrigued by what the do not know. This goes for undersea, outer space, and for our purposes, the supernatural.
ReplyDeleteThe popularity of horror films can be directly linked to this reasoning. Vampires, werewolves, ghosts, etc. are mysterious to us, and a lot of what we know about them is from literature, theater, and cinema. Watching these characters come alive, plants a seed in our minds as to question if they actually exist among us. Karg, Spiate, and Sutherland write it best in saying, “Horror films have a rich history featuring a wide range of tales that prey upon the innate human curiosities surrounding all things that shock, creep, scream, howl, bite, vanish, fly, mutate, and generally move to scare the knickers off of us” (174). Looking at the early depiction of vampires and vampire hunters in the modern media can be best seen in Nosferatu of 1924 and Dracula 1931.
Nosferatu was the first silent vampire film based directly off of Bram Stoker’s Dracula. Though names were changed, the biggest difference was Count Orlock who was technically Dracula, but “more in keeping with the heinous vampires of folklore” (177). This definitely began the frenzy that is vampires as creatures, rather than alluring people that can blend in with society. The idea of the ‘ugly vampire’ is what we often see in horror films. There is much appeal to this character type because they make you feel fearful and give more of a feeling of uncertainty. The way Nosferatu’s vampire is describes is “a shocking amalgam of preternatural predator and subversive sexual deviant. Max Schreck as Count Orlock is, quite simply, a terrifying monster by all account” (210). This description in itself is enough to give you the chills. The deviance is what draws the audience in, as well as the innate fear of the unknown that lies within us all.
On the other hand there is the attractive vampire who captures its viewer. Not to say this type cannot be frightening, but not overtly like Count Orlock of Nosferatu. In 1931, Bela Lugosi took on the role of Dracula, setting the tone for all who would follow him: “that of a preternatural being who could roam among us with few distinctions that would undermine his humanity. Lugosi, with his Hungarian accent and the constant light beaming across his eyes, would set in stone the menace, obsession, charm and depravity we’ve come to expect of the most wicked denizen of the night” (190). The portrayals of those who can survive in daily life and blend in are more of what we see in modern day television and film like True Blood and Twilight. However, even these modern vampires have less of a threatening edge as Lugosi’s intriguing character from 1931.
Tying all of these ideas back together leads to the answer of why we are so into the supernatural cinema. Whether they are vampires, werewolves, what have you, there is sex appeal, danger, and mystery wrapped up into one. The combination is truly unbeatable as far as gaining the attention of an audience is concerned. Yes, we may be scared, but a character or film that can truly make its viewer cringe or feel uneasy is something people enjoy. There is a serious fascination attached to the things we are unsure of which makes horror all the more appetizing!
So many people have been obsessed with vampires for as long as we know, and Nosferatu (1924) and Dracula (1931), have really paved the way and influenced how vampires are portrayed in the modern media. Many similar themes in these two films are still very apparent in vampire and supernatural media today. Not only have these two films set certain traits of the modern vampire, but they have had a lot of influence in storylines of the modern media as well. Several situations and ideas seen in these early films can be found in literally every single vampire or supernatural film in existence since their creation.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most significant ideas that still exists is the fact that vampires and other supernatural beings seem to be “scorned in society”, as seen in Nosferatu. (Chapter 14) They are outcasts in their communities and are highly frowned upon. This can be seen in True Blood, and really any film or television show containing vampires, werewolves, etc. Typically, they try to hide their identity, so they can coexist in a normal society with regular humans, while showing their true persona at night, in private, with other vampires, etc.
In regards to hiding their identity, 1931’s Dracula, illustrates the fact that vampires can come off and present themselves as “cultured, domesticated humans.” (Chapter 14) This idea can also be seen in almost every film and television show including vampires and the supernatural. They come off as charming and welcoming, typically hiding any clues that lead anyone to believe that they are anything but human.
Nosferatu also portrays the blood sacrifice involving a female. As we can see, in countless modern vampire films and television shows, women are often involved in sacrifices, being victims, or being the object of interest of vampires and the supernatural.
As previously mentioned, these ideas are not only seen in these two early films, they are used in almost every single media text in this genre. Clearly something about it is working, because people continue to come back for more. Why do people keep on coming back for more of the same things over and over again?
Just as the idea of the vampire, the unknown is an equally seductive concept. We are so fascinated by media containing vampires and the supernatural because we do not have all the answers. These creatures can potentially give us possible answers to life and what happens to us when we are gone. Curiosity arises about vampires and the supernatural because we typically do not have real life experiences with them. Not only are they alluring creatures themselves, but they also make the media they are apart of pull us in just as much as they do alone.
Not only does the unknown attract us to these films, but those who are cast in the films and the television shows also up the obsession of vampire and supernatural media. All of Chapter 15 discusses the significant actors and actresses that have been cast in this genre of media. So many of the actors and actresses themselves are attractive people, along with playing the role of an alluring vampire. Who would not be interested in watching, for example, an attractive man who is supposed to be a vampire, seduce an innocent attractive woman?
Although many of these films have similar plot lines, situations, and themes, seeing different people portray different vampires and other characters is actually quite interesting. Examining and viewing the differences of the characters keeps us coming back for more. If someone’s favorite actor, who had never played a vampire before, was cast in a new vampire series, they would be sure to watch it just to see how they performed and what their new character was like.
Key players in this media genre capitalize on the how attractive the unknown is, and how curious viewers enjoy watching attractive people play out the unknown. The unknown mixed with classic vampire and supernatural themes, illustrated in Nosferatu and Dracula, make for the perfect genre that will always have a huge following.
The idea of media, film, and cinema is to bring to the larger screen awareness of what is going on in society, during a certain age and time. The film industry is a platform by which all of our human fears, concerns, instincts, and experiences can be portrayed, warped, or totally recreated. With the genre of horror especially, filmmakers, directors, and writers have the unique ability to effectively recreate these specific traits of humanity, playing on our innermost fears to not only make a buck, but a statement about our lives and societies. According to Karg, Spaite, and Sutherland, characters such as Dracula became a part of the “cultural medium,” where a spectacular and very famous vampire creature garnered the “ability to reflect—in all measure of blatant and subliminal methods what is occurring in society during various eras” (175).
ReplyDeleteWhen concerning the role of vampires within films, we are most heavily drawn to the fact that vampires are immortal. Their inability to die leaves humans, who are inarguably mortal, with a sense of wonder—What is it like to live for centuries, after losing loved ones and experiencing changes of time and modernity? It ultimately makes viewers question death in general, a fear that no one is definitely resistant to. Horror films especially have the ability to bring nightmares alive—the threat of murderers, monsters, beasts, and witches can easily change the mind of any impressionable viewer. Horror films also hold importance because they are often based on “folklore,” and old legends, tales, and histories of different cultures and societies throughout the world. The 1922 film, Nosferatu, was a silent vampire film (loosely based on Bram Stoker’s classic novel) that portrayed a vampire as an all-around monster, gross to behold, and resembling the typical stereotype of the monster under your bed. Count Orlock is “truly ugly in his conception,” and “unlike the suave, debonair, tail-coated Draculas we would be treated to in decades to come, Count Orlock is more in keeping with the heinous vampires of folklore” (177).
Part II
ReplyDeleteNosferatu is a prominent movie because although it was a silent film, its actors and the use of expressionism in filming the scenes sustained horror and fright within the audiences, making the vampire an integral part of the horror genre. Once Nosferatu made a name for itself, the countless other movies that would encapsulate Dracula made the father of all vampires seem seductive and charming, rather than hideous and fearful to behold. Now possessing a “mortal grace,” Dracula appears as just another member of society, with an aristocratic, appealing air that many of those who enter his life are unable to resist (179). In The Everything Vampire Book, the authors are quick to point out that there is a major fear in being unable to quickly deem a person as a bloodsucking villain (180). In reality, humans are prone to have a fear in trusting people; we are inevitably vulnerable creatures who rely on our emotions and the strength of fellow men and women. Thus, the fear in losing trust in someone who happens to also be a cold-blooded, immortal killer must scare people more than the average monster would. Vampires seem to test our faith in humanity, and in our own capabilities of being able to differentiate between real and false.
Thus, although it may seem strange to us that dozens of films could have been made based on a sole character, it isn’t all that hard to soon figure out why this is so. The emergence of the Hammer films, featuring Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing, as well as the fame of Bela Lugosi, have substantiated the cult following of vampire movies, actors, and plays. Along with werewolves and ghosts, vampires have become ingrained in our minds as possible creatures of existence. With their ties to European history and international cultures, we begin to see a sort of reality to an extremely scary creature. With that ability, the media can tap into these fears and capitalize on them, whether in a comedic or horrifying manner.
Part I
ReplyDeleteOvertime, the film industry has seen the success of various genres of film making, but horror films, including vampire productions, have continuously succeeded in capturing the hearts and minds of its mass audiences. Personally, I hate horror movies and refuse to willingly sit through one for the same reason that many people love the genre. The reason, perfectly explained in The Everything Vampire Book, is that horror films have “a history of wide range of tales that prey upon the innate human curiosities surrounds all things that shock, creep, scream, howl, bite, vanish, fly, mutate, and generally move to scare” (The Everything Vampire Book 174). Audiences, both young and old, will always be intrigued by those factors that trigger the human curiosities. What captures its audience is the aspect of the unknown, of the mysterious. Unless based on a true story, which in terms of vampire films could be debated, we are too curious of what could happen in the unexpected.
The vampire culture of both past and present must recognize Bram Stoker’s Dracula as the standard by which horror fiction is measured. Dracula represents the standard vampiric characteristics and plot lines, as it is because of Dracula that audiences love to engage themselves in the idea that vampires reflect what is occurring in society during the various eras, in both palpable and subtle ways. No film has achieved success the way Dracula has, as there are many adaptations of the original text. Whenever a vampire is mentioned in any context, the characteristics of Dracula come to mind. Dracula set in stone the characteristics that we still associate with vampires: fangs, black clothes, cape, pale skin, mirrors, blood, etc.
Part II
ReplyDeleteNosferatu, an expressionist film directed by F.W. Murnau, is an unauthorized version of Dracula set in Bremen, Germany. Nosferatu comes from the Slavonic word ‘nosufuratu’, which translates to ‘plague-carrier’ (The Everything Vampire Book 177), which is a more accurate term to describe vampires as accordance to lore which blamed vampires as the cause of plagues. Nosferatu features Count Orlock, who portrays heinous vampire characteristics similar to Dracula-claw-like fingers, pointed ears, bald head, etc. According to the Everything Vampire Book, Count Orlock represented the scorned of society, a vile creature living in seclusion. Nosferatu places significance on the horror and sci-fi film genre by portraying sexuality through the fear of the villagers that Orlock came into contact with. Sexuality is a key factor in vampire films, adding to the list of reasons why/how vampires lust on their prey. Nosferatu is also significant in the horror film of the past and present as it was filmed on location—an aspect that brought the idea of reality and menace to the audience. The fact that it was also a silent film brought an additional fear to the audience, and emphasized the features of vampires. The various adaptations of Dracula brought out the portrayals of Dracula’s brides who are subject to vampire bites or vampire hunters, but it wasn’t until Gloria Holden’s character as Countess Marya Zaleska in ‘Dracula’s Daughter’ that there was a lead female vampire. Before Marya, it was common for actresses to make the vampiric debut as a supporting role. Since then, there have been many actresses who took on the roles of female vampires and brought about the idea that women could control a vampire film without a male lead. Female vampires have been given the reputation of being naughty vixens who use their sexuality to manipulate their prey—a detail that is not limited to the vampire genre, but almost every genre of the mass media. In present-day media, vampire films and television shows are more popular than ever, and females have the lead role as much as their male counterparts. All of the vampire productions use sexuality as way for both gender vampires to obtain their “food”, but this has been inflated since the time of Dracula and Nosferatu. We still use their basic characteristics when we think of vampires, and unless modern media strays from these characteristics to the complete opposite extreme, generations to come will have those two films to credit for the scary vampire figures they will come to know and love (or love to hate).
Samantha Howard
ReplyDeleteIn the Everything Vampire Book we learn that horror films, particularly those featuring supernatural creatures, have been so popular because they “prey upon innate human curiosities” (174). These supernatural creatures, whether they were vampires, werewolves or another feared supernatural creature, provided an alternate realm from viewers’ real day to day lives. From print to screen these characters became more imaginable and therefore created more of an escape. Filmmakers used these archetypal supernatural characters to include blatant and subliminal messages about what was happening during the era in which the movie is set.
Nosferatu is an example of how Bram Stoker’s story influenced vampires in the media, so much so that Henrik Galeen used Dracula’s plot simply changing the setting and the character names. Since this was the first popular film adaptation of the vampire tale, it set the look for the standard grotesque vampire, and being a silent film this was shown with an abundance of special effects. In all vampire stories, no matter what the vampire’s beliefs or wishes are, they are ultimately presented as being first stricken with bloodlust then whatever their additional character traits were. This practice can be traced back to Nosferatu.
The Hammer Films that emerged from London in the early 1900s, provided the framework for the scene that exists today. They created two of the most successful horror films of their time, The Curse of Frankenstein and Horror of Dracula. From there they created many spin offs using these worldwide-known characters. This is very similar to today authors like Charlaine Harris and Laurell K. Hamilton publish collective books containing short stories featuring their popular characters.
When Universal Studios gained the rights to the story of Dracula, Hollywood forever changed the appearance of vampires. Although they still displayed the bloodlust and animalistic features of a vampire, the Count’s overall appearance was polished and handsome. This added to the fascination among the American public with vampires, because this new version of the character of Dracula “could roam among us with few distinctions that would undermine his humanity” (190). This is present in many books, shows and movies today. In the Vampire Diaries, with their rings, Stefan and Damon appear to be human, in Twilight, the Cullens have beautiful human-like qualities, and in True Blood the vampires appear to be human as well. In modern culture it seems as though it is more pleasing and thrilling to have a beautiful human-like creature with deadly qualities and strengths than to have a grotesque creature with the same deadly qualities.
In the 1940s many comedic spinoffs of Dracula and other horror films emerged which have greatly influenced our usage of vampires in movies and books today. Some of these were not intended to be comedic, but the over dramatization of these characters in turn was comedic. Today almost every horror movie and vampire series has a parody. For horror films in general there is the Scary Movie Series, and for twilight there is the book Nightlight and there is the movie Vampires Suck. Comedy and parody have been commonly used especially in the genera of horror and the supernatural whether it is in the piece itself or is a separate piece created in response to the original.
Exploring this history of vampires in the media has made me realize that there are no new and original stories out there. Every new vampire or supernatural book, movie or TV show is creating new versions of characters that are based off of conventions that were established in the 1800s with Bram Stoker’s Dracula. The road that these supernatural characters have taken along the years has shown what does work and what doesn’t as well as how these characters are timeless and given the right setting, dialogue and plot these characters will entertain groups from all time periods.
Ashley Heiberger (Part 1)
ReplyDeleteHorror films have become popular with audiences over the years due to a number of reasons, which include better technology, more acceptable society and curiosity of the unknown. As we discussed in class on the seventh of September, we came to the conclusion that humans are curious about the afterlife. Some people want to speak to the dead, some want to know their future and some need scientific proof to help further their beliefs. As Paige Smith said in class, her friend lost her girlfriend and went to a psychic to reach her. The psychic knew a lot about her and it was unsettling for her friend. People may not believe in ghosts or vampires, but there is scientific proof that things are inexplicable, such as mediums who cannot determine what is making noises in a house. The proof of all these creatures lay within context; novels, movies and magazines. People may have real ghosts stories but who knows a vampire off-screen? Also, special effects of modern technology make horror films that much scarier. A three-dimensional horror film makes it feel as though someone is chasing you right in your seat! The audience craves the rush of adrenaline. Lastly, more is allowed in society today. There are more scenes with gore, sex, drugs, and homosexuals in movies. Movies in Hollywood like to be remade and vampire movies have original context so that is a great reason for the audience to want to see them, especially if romance and fighting is involved (Twilight saga).
According to Karg, the “filmmakers who first brought Dracula to the big screen set in stone the idea that as a cultural medium, the vampire’s tale, as with many other genre-specific characters, has the ability to reflect” (174). With this being said, filmmakers who are interested in vampires have something to start with while reproducing another vampire film. There has to be a beginning for everything and Bram Stoker’s dramatic Dracula (1931) really gave other filmmakers a push. Stoker’s Dracula influenced the portrayal of vampires in modern media through a number of ways. First, he made his story come alive by setting the location in a real place, Transylvania (Karg 72). “Even the name…’Transylvania’ is so simultaneously eerie,” that when people hear the word Transylvania they think of vampires (Karg 72). Secondly, Stoker provided “drama, romance, graphic horror, supernatural occurrences, sexual repression, politics of aristocracy bleeding the lower classes, religious fight of good vs. evil and immortality” to his audience (Karg 39). This alone made vampires in modern media irresistible.
Ashley Heiberger (Part II)
ReplyDeleteStoker has created characters that seem real and come alive to our society today. The main one is Van Helsing with his “extreme latitude in dealing with the supernatural” (Karg 41). This character influenced vampire hunting and started ways of how to kill vampires. Van Helsing would go to any means to end a vampire’s immortality (Karg 41). Jonathan Harker slit Dracula’s throat, but did not kill him; it was Quincey who forced his Bowie knife into Dracula’s heart. Stoker created Mina and Dracula to have a hypnotic bond but Mina had “no intentions of succumbing to evil” (Karg 43). This influenced TrueBlood by incorporating the idea when a vampire drinks a human’s blood (Eric with Sookie) they are connected. Another idea that made vampires seem realistic was that Stoker included vampire hunting; garlic was one of the means of warding vampires off, right before decapitation and staking them. Stoker influenced the portrayal of vampires in the media today, even though his first play was a failure.
Nosferatu (1922) helped Dracula get noticed (Karg 48), which I think is interesting because I have never heard of Nosferatu before this class. It actually is “one of the most well-known and revered vampire movies in history…a silent film that survived the inevitable ravages of time” (Karg 176). It is similar to Dracula but with different characters and the setting changed so the producers would not get charged with copyright (Karg 177). This film portrayed vampires with fangs, bald heads, claw-like fingers, and rats in buildings, like in Dracula (Karg 178). Of course, there is a scene in which someone is cut and the vampire goes crazy and licks the wound. This itself influences modern media today. For example, in Twilight, Bella Swan gets a paper cut and Edward’s brother Jasper lunges at her. Karg also mentions that going in the sun makes vampires turn into smoke. From then on, vampires suffer in daylight in the media. Overall, both these early vampire films have influenced the portrayal of both vampires and vampire hunters in modern media; especially when the vampire appears to be a “domesticated human” which makes it that much more monstrous (Karg 181). That gives humans a slight curiosity that maybe vampires do exist in our world.
Movies have been a form of entertainment for many years. From the beginning when they just consisted of black and white everyday scenarios to the computer generated effects of today, movies have been something which audiences can relate to. How then can audiences relate to something as horrific as a vampire coming to suck your blood? Well the main reason is fear. The movie genre of horror evokes some of human’s greatest fears of dying, being attacked and of course that which we cannot explain.
ReplyDeleteHorror films thrive on the unknown and that is why audiences keep on coming back. Some people are looking for answers while others are just curious about the stories. It isn’t enough to just watch a movie of something that goes bump in the night, but the film has to be creative and imaginative in order to keep the audience involved. With that being said some of the best horror films have had to do with the supernatural because these aren’t characters we face in our everyday lives.
Vampires are a supernatural being that have dominated film and television for many years. Their intriguing appearance and lifestyle has been able to obtain a large audience and have them keep coming back for more. One of the first vampires we encounter in film was that of Count Orlock in Nosferatu in 1924. Even though this character was based off Bram Stoker’s Count Dracula, the similarities weren’t all there. Our text book describes Orlock as having “an almost rat like appearance” (177). What made Orlock different than Stoker’s Dracula was that he wasn’t human like, he was more of a monster. He had animal-like characteristics and was just plain creepy looking. With this character though “a precedent was set for the vampire as both ugly and predatory” (188).
Nosferatu also made many other precedents toward modern day horror films. “Orlock represented a scorned society” (178), and many vampire characters we see in film and television aren’t accepted by society. Orlock also has an “underlying sexuality” which was represented by the fear people had of him (178). Most vampire films have a sexual theme about them in that they can use their sexuality to lure in their prey. Another concept that the Nosferatu story used was that it “disguised the exchange of bodily fluids with the spread of plague” (178). This concept then became popular and used in many other horror and sci-fi films.
Even though Nosferatu influenced many modern horror films nothing compares to that of Dracula (1931). Bela Lugosi’s Dracula is the most recognizable character of all vampire films. When Tod Browning got the rights to Dracula he was able to take creative license and used Hamilton Deane’s and John Bladerstone’s revamped Count Dracula to create one of the most influential vampires of all time. Everything about Lugosi’s appearance “set the tone for all Draculas that would come”( 180) Everything from his accent, to the way he dressed, and even his special powers have been used in many different adaptation of Dracula and other vampires in movies and TV.
This new Dracula created “the very idea the Dracula was a preternatural malfeasant who could appear as a cultured, domesticated human” (180). This deception of Dracula as being disguised as human scared audiences more because it was became more believable that vampires could be real. The idea of Dracula being able to live amongst humans is probably one of the most significant ideas ever to come to vampire horror films. This idea alone is used many times again in film and television. This comes up in films such as Twilight, and in TV shows such as Trueblood, The Munsters, and The Vampire Diaries.
Both Nosferatu and Dracula helped to create some of the most horrific, intense, and even lovable vampires we have come to see in modern day. These movies’s creative influence is something that has been able to entice audiences and keep them coming back for more.
Sexy. Terrifying. Fear of the unknown. These three reasons are why I believe vampires and the supernatural today in the media are so appealing to audiences. The seduction of vampires comes from the actions of neck biting and blood sucking. This sexual act draws the audience in but the fear factor keeps them there. They fear the unknown. The unknown intrigues them. They are intrigued by the fact that a vampire could walk amongst the living and suck us into their immortal world. When did this phenomenon begin? Why do we like the taboo of vampires and the supernatural? When we look back to original vampire films such as Dracula and Nosferatu we see vampires portrayed as grotesque as they come. Not physically sexy at all. They are physically terrifying and their appearance sends shivers down your spine. The art directors and writers wanted audiences to feel a sense of fear. They wanted audiences to feel fear and wonder if anyone they knew could potentially be or turn into a vampire. The fear of the unknown, the mystery of it all, is an element we see not only in past vampire media but in present day vampire media as well. Most importantly though, we want to know more about these characters today. Why are we so intrigued by the unknown? Why are we so attracted to the terror of vampires? Did this genre always appeal to us?
ReplyDeleteIn the Everything Vampire Book, Karg describes the original depiction of the character of Count in the 1924 film Nosferatu as, “Truly ugly in his conception—due in no small part to the film’s art director Albin Grau—the unblinking Count has an almost rat like appearance, with long claw like fingers, a bald head, hollowed face, pointed ears, exceptionally long rodent-type fangs, and a legion of decocted rats that would give Willard a run for his money.” (Karg 178) Count was portrayed as quite unattractive, more importantly, terrifying. These grotesque features have slowly begun to be stripped away in the modern media, possibly because “sex sells” more today over anything else. So, why not use that trait of vampire to gain larger audiences? For example, in Stephanie Meyer’s series Twilight, Edward Cullen, along with the rest of the Cullen clan, are depicted as very, very handsome which is why mortals are so drawn to them. Today, the sex appeal is seen more physically than during the days of Count. For example, in the television series True Blood, the character of Bill Compton is a tall, suave man with pale skin. However, his exceptionally long fangs come out from time to time. Today, we see the long claw like fingers and rat like appearances in witches, yet, in vampires, we see ordinary, somewhat dashing, handsome people who have fangs. Their fangs are the key feature we still see today. If you look at most vampire media, the feature of the fangs are what is seen in almost all vampire stories. It is a vampire’s most prominent feature.
These fangs are used for bloodsucking, which is the first thing anyone thinks of when they think of a vampire, regardless of the rest of their appearance. Overall, we see that in the original vampire stories, physical appearances are what are mainly used to terrify audiences. Today, the attributes of vampires are less focused on physical appearances and more focused on their personality traits and mental attitudes.
The aforementioned fangs are used for biting and bloodsucking. The bite sizes vary in both Dracula and Nosferatu, which we still see today. “Early films such as Bela Lugosi’s Dracula in 1931 and even the 1922 silent film Noseferatu didn’t show Dracula actually biting the necks of his victims…Over the decades both literary and celluloid bloodsuckers have punctured necks with fangs of varying sizes ranging from pin pricks to holes the size of softballs. Stoker described his Dracula as having ‘peculiarly sharp white teeth’ and later in the tale, when Lucy Westenra is first bitten, Mina describes the bite as ‘two little red points like pin-pricks’,” (Karg 89-90) Pin-prick and hole bites are still quite prominent in modern media vampire depictions today. Most of the time, we see vampires taking large bites, the size of holes, in the media. As Mina of Dracula described the pin-pricks, that is what we see in the television series True Blood as well. In True Blood, many of the women who have two little red points on their body like pin-pricks are now branded as have been being bitten by a vampire. Dracula gave us this depiction and we still see it today. It is the subtle sign a vampire has touched a mortal which sends shivers down spines more than biting a gaping hole out of someone’s skin. These actions which were intentionally used to terrify us are now used in modern vampire media to seduce us. We are intrigued by the sexiness of the biting and sucking because it is portrayed sexually in modern vampire television and film.
ReplyDeleteDracula and Noseferatu both have influenced our vampire media today however vampire media has morphed since then as well. From descriptions and depictions of vampires’ physical features to their actions upon humans, vampires in film, television, and books are seen as having grotesque, intimidating features however, there is a mysterious and sexual appeal about them that has audiences intrigued. From Dracula and Nosferatu vampire media has easily become the most intriguing, terrifying, and sexy genre today because of the foundations those stories constructed.
Vampire and supernatural creatures are becoming more and more popular in film because of peoples growing interests in horror films. Some people genuinely love watching these films because they find them interesting and appealing as to what might be real and what is a little far-fetched. On the other hand, some go to see these films because to the romantic aspect of them, whether it is in the film or is in your life. Whatever your preference is the horror film industry is on the rise and I don’t see it dwindling any time soon.
ReplyDeleteI find the reason that horror films are on the rise in two different ways. There are those, mostly men, who look to find a scary film and take a girl out on a date so that way during the scary parts they will hold on to them boosting their romantic situation. Whether it works or not I believe some producers do looks at different parts of their films to see if it has that kind of scary part making everyone jump and hold on to someone. The fear that is created in the films is also another crucial part as to why there is a growing popularity. In today generation people loved to be scared, for some odd reason, but it is because it provides them with a type of adrenaline boosting them. Some of that fear sticks with people longer then you would think also. I can remember being in seventh grade and watching a movie called Darkness Falls. It is a story about the tooth fairy. It is still to this day one of the scariest movies I have ever seen because we are raised thinking that this mythical people is real and nice, so watching a horror movie about it scared me beyond belief. I would say it took me a good four years to finally be able to sleep every time my little sister lost a tooth. The fear in these movies make them so appealing towards people because as I said you grow up thinking some of these creatures are actually real, some grow out of it while others continue to believe. “Whether vampires truly exist or not is up to you. We, like so many other chroniclers of history and lore, can do no more that explore the vampiric realm and limn its depths – however sane or supernatural they may be.” (5).
). We have been provided an image of what a vampire could look like in our heads based on the information out there, most of the characteristics coming from Stoker’s Dracula. I am sure everyone has seen a movie that has scared the life out of them and then cannot sleep that night because what they saw might actually be out there. Some people enjoy it while others will state the next day they don’t ever want to watch another scary movie. It is an adrenaline rush in my opinion that excitement of waiting for something to popped out at any moment keeps viewers on the edge of their seats throughout the entire movie. “Horror films have a rich history featuring a wide range of tales that prey upon the innate human curiosities surrounding all things that shock, creep, scream, howl, bite, vanish, fly, mutate, and generally move to scare the knickers off us.” (174). I wouldn’t be surprises if during class the question of how many of you have ever gotten scared when they hear a howling sound late at night, and a fourth of the class or more raised their hands. The characteristics that have be distilled in us from films or TV shows is something that will always be in the back of our minds.
ReplyDeleteThe film industry will always come up with new films about the supernatural and vampires because they interest people. The whole what if factor come into play whenever vampires or supernatural creatures are brought up. Whatever the real answer may be as to their existence the fear that comes with these creatures is something that will always be around and that is why the film industry is able to be so successful when it comes to the horror films.
The main purpose of film is to tell a story while making the audience have an emotional attachment to the story and characters. Whether these feelings are anger, sadness, laughter or fear it still puts the audiences emotions on a rollercoaster. The supernatural as genre of film has captured an audience since the late 1800s (The Everything Vampire Book 174). It is apparent that the reasons these films have been so popular is because of their entertainment value, but what about them is so entertaining to society, and how did these early films influence our portrayal of the vampire in our films today?
ReplyDeleteAs humans we are clearly interested in the unknown, such as ghosts, werewolves, vampires and other supernatural creatures. Although it is very interesting to learn about something that is not familiar to us what exactly is the big obsession? Unlike many of these supernatural creatures we are not immortal, and the idea of not knowing what happens after you pass on is a nerve racking thought for many. Therefore we become interested in these creatures, because in a way they know what happens after death, whether our soul remains trapped on earth as a ghost, or our body rises without a soul as a vampire. The question of what happens after death is not the only reason we are interested in the supernatural. “…the possibilities for creating and integrating myths of monsters is that like many genres born of literature and real life events, a touch of imagination… can become entirely surreal, mesmerizing , and terrifying (The Everything Vampire Book 174).” With stressful day-to-day lives many look for a way to escape reality by entering the world of the supernatural through media. In the supernatural world there is the ability to enter a world that is completely different than the one we are living in; there is always an element of excitement, fear, and imagination. These films have given us an outlet from reality and the ability to in our own imaginations imagine what happens after we pass on.
Early vampire films have had more effect on the portrayal of vampires in our media today than we realize. In modern day vampire films and television shows we have been presented with very attractive vampires. It is a common misconception that the use of attractive vampires is a new idea, it has actually been around since the Deane/Balderston adaptation of Dracula. When bringing Dracula to the theater they revamped the Counts physical appearance (The Everything Vampire Book 180).” This eventually led to the vampires that we know today. We can compare many of the characteristics from modern vampires like Eric Northman and Bill Compton to the characteristics of Count Dracula.
Although most vampires today are attractive we cannot forget the influence of Nosferatu, a silent vampire film that was created in 1922. The film was very similar to Stoker’s Dracula with altered names for characters and a change of location from Transylvania to Bremen, Germany (The Everything Vampire Book 176). Count Orlock’s appearance follows that of folklore vampires; he has a ratlike face, clawed fingers, pointed ears, long fangs, a baldhead and hallowed face compared to Dracula who is cultured to appear to be domesticated as a human. Nosferatu is the exact opposite of Count Dracula’s character, from this film we are reminded about the animalistic reality of vampires. This is especially true when Orlock attempts to lick the blood from Hutter’s wound (The Everything Vampire Book 178). Although we are now presented with an attractive vampire we are still reminded of animalistic characteristics that they possess. We see this in Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight Series when Victoria, Laurent, and James attack Waylon Forge on his boat. It reminds us that although they seem attractive and appealing you cannot trust a vampire.
ReplyDeleteBela Lugosi’s portrayal of Dracula in 1931 introduced many characteristics of vampires to film such as mist, dust, no reflection in mirrors, the ability to transform into bats and the famous line “I never drink…wine.” (The Everything Vampire Book 213). These characteristics have continued to stick with vampire media today. In the film Mom’s Got a Date with a Vampire from 2000, the children discover the man their mother is going on a date with is a vampire from his lack of reflection in a mirror.
It is apparent that earlier vampire works have outlined the modern vampire. Many characteristics have remained the same throughout the years, from their attractiveness, to their animalistic abilities. Without some of these earlier works like Nosferatu, and Dracula our current day vampire could have completely different characteristics than we know today.
Horror films have been extremely popular in the movie industry ever since films were created. The movies that have always been scary for viewers include vampires, werewolves and other supernatural creatures. Vampire movies, especially as of late, have become a big hit in Hollywood. The Everything Vampire Book gives an excellent explanation of why audiences enjoy these films, “Horror films have a rich history featuring a wide range of tales that prey upon the innate human curiosities surrounding all the things that shock, creep, scream, howl, bite, vanish, fly, mutate, and generally move to scare the knickers off us. (Karg 174)” We are intrigued by our fears of the supernatural. The Twilight series is a rare exception though, as it shows the supernatural as good looking characters. The Twilight series has caught fire since coming out as a book and has been a huge success on the big screen. Naturally, when something has success other people will try to take advantage of it and make a similar movie. Fright Night is an example of this. It is a remake of the film from 1985 but it is being made for the success that Twilight has brought to the vampire and supernatural world. Even more movies about the supernatural are scheduled to come out in the next year or so. Johnny Depp will be starring in Dark Shadows, which will be a vampire movie that will have a gothic theme. The rapid production of horror movies has been no surprise to me. The early films of Nosferatu, in 1924, and Dracula, in 1931, helped influence the portrayal of vampires in today’s media.
ReplyDeleteNosferatu was a silent film that has someone survived the advances of the movie world. Why is it still talked about today? It set the standard of how scary vampires can really be with the way the look and act. The description of the Count alone can make someone feel terrified and fear to even watch the film. The description is, “The unblinking Count has an almost ratlike appearance, with long clawlike fingers, a bald head, hollowed face, pointed ears, exceptionally long rodent-type fangs, and a legion of devoted rats that would give Willard a run for his money. (Karg 178)” The Count is a bit of an exaggeration of what we see in films today, however Nosferatu brings the scary of the vampire from the inside and puts it into Counts physical appearances. We always see how scary vampires are in their heart and The Everything Vampire Book says, “With only a few exceptions, the silver screen vampire will always be a predator at heart, regardless of hi or hers beliefs or revulsions, and that is clearly demonstrated in Nosferatu. (Karg 178)” Those characteristics is what makes it a horror film but it is what keeps us intrigued to keep going to see supernatural movies.
The film Dracula also played a part in what we see in vampire films today. Despite some differences of the role of the characters, this production is very similar to Bram Stoker’s Dracula. The movie became the highest-grossing film in 1931 and that does not surprise me at all with our love of the supernatural. The 1931 version of Dracula created a whole new aspect of a vampire. That new aspect was that now a vampire would be able to wear normal clothes and live amongst us. This created a new curiosity for the audiences. After seeing horror movies, I will often walk around thinking, what if the people I live with are actually vampires? That is an odd thought and it should be something that you should shake off right away, but then we always look to see if there are any similarities. The characteristic of vampires seeming perfectly human is something still seen today. However that was not the only thing that Dracula led the way in. According to our textbook, “Lugosi, with his Hungarian accent and the constant light beaming across his eyes, would set in stone the menace, obsession, charm, and depravity we’ve come to expect of the most wicked denizen of the night. (Karg 190)” These are exactly the characteristics that are most common in vampires in the media today.
ReplyDeleteThese two movies revolutionized the way we see vampires in the day and dark in the films today. It is amazing to see how audiences continue to love supernatural movies despite the fact that the story or characteristics never really change. Horror films do a great job of getting our attention and the idea was set all the way back to Nosferatu and Dracula.
Geordie Geller
ReplyDeletePeople have always been fascinated with horror films because of the thrill behind being terrified. The supernatural can be frightening because of the unknown elements that are out of our control. For many people being scared makes them feel alive. For others who have a deep belief in the supernatural, the films are a way for them to stay connected to what they believe in. “The true creative genius of the horror industry is that audiences of all ages and generations will never cease becoming obsessed with thing that go bump in the night” (Karg, p. 174).
Nosferatu: The Scourge of Bremen (1922) was an unauthorized version of Stoker’s Dracula (Karg, p. 176). It was a silent expressionist film, overusing special effects making it captivating and frightening for the audience. Count Orlock “Dracula” was extremely repulsive. He also had a hollowed face, pointed ears, long claw-like finger nails and fangs. The film kept to the representation of the vampire from stoker’s book. Audiences were given the type of vampire they had read about which fanned the flames of the vampire craze.
In 1931 Bela Lugosi helped to bring Stoker’s Dracula to life on the silver screen in a brand new way (Karg, p.189). Lugosi along with Tod Browning, who directed adapted the film more from the play than the book. While the film takes from the novel much of story and its characters were altered for the film. “What many consider to be a crucial point in the evolution of Stoker’s original vampire are the changes Deane and Balderston made, taking Stoker’s somewhat ghoulish figure to a well-spoken, impeccably dressed, parlor vampire” (Karg, p.190). “It is considered to be one of the greatest, if not the greatest vampire film of all time” (Karg, p.189).
Dracula changed the way vampires were portrayed. They went from being hideous, antisocial creatures to being handsome and charming. Vampires had already been shown as sexual creatures, but their appearance and social demeanor made them unrelatable. Standing at six-foot-five Christopher Lee helped develop the animalistic and sexually charged Dracula (Karg, p.191). Dracula’s refined appearance helped to make him a seductive character, leading to the characterization of modern vampires. Peter Cushing helped bring to life Van Helsing and made him into the trusted vampire hunter you could not help but root for. He paved the way for the future adaptations of the character giving him depth.
Both films focused on the concept of drinking blood which has translated to modern vampire characters. The tall, dark and handsome vampire is a formula that has been used for decades, and has continued to attract audiences. While vampires have become more social creatures they have also had to fight their animal urges. In new vampire films, they have fought their urges because they knew its wrong, which is something everyone can relate to.
(1/2) “No one will come any nearer than that…in the night, in the dark” was what I remember my mother saying as she tucked me into bed as a little kid; her attempt at quoting Mrs. Dudley from The Haunting seemed to grow into a nighttime ritual for us. If it was a Saturday night, this was probably preceded by a bowl of ice cream at 9:30 while watching the newest episode of “Are You Afraid of the Dark?”; if I was lucky I got to stay up with the big kids for Tales from the Crypt even though I was terrified, and that’s an understatement, of the Crypt Keeper. I grew up in the family who loved scary movies and I was probably exposed to them at an earlier age than a child should be, but I guess that is what you get for being the baby in the family. I loved watching scary things but I distinctly remember finding comfort in the fact that my childhood bed had drawers under it so I never had to worry about what monsters dwelled under it. It also helped that my older sister whom I shared a room with, always let me keep my seashell nightlight on throughout the night. I remember not wanting to walk by a drain or go to the circus after watching It. I remember never wanting an American Girl doll because they reminded me too much of Talking Tina from The Twilight Zone. I remember loving that I lived in New York, a place far away from Haddonfield, IL. I remember being scared, but for the life of me I can’t remember why I grew to love scary movies as much as I do. Why do we love being scared?
ReplyDeleteCan we attribute this to “the true creative genius of the horror industry”, a group responsible for being the reason why “audiences of all ages and generations will never cease becoming obsessed with things that go bump in the night” (Karg, Spaite, & Sutherland 174)? When I think of the reasons why people love films, one thing that comes to mind is the idea of escaping reality and being absorbed by the silver screen. Normally we are just transformed to a different time period or a place we have never visited before. However, when it comes to horror films, I think viewers get engulfed by the idea of something that can “transport us to worlds unknown”; there is this fascination with creatures and worlds that we don’t get to come in contact with daily (Karg, Spaite, & Sutherland 174). Watching a horror film is similar to the people going to haunted houses during Halloween; we hate being scared when things actually frighten us, but sometimes, when we know that something’s coming and we have ample opportunity to cover our eyes, being scared is, well, fun.
(2/2) Even though we love all the werewolves, mummies, and other ghouls that make up the monster mash of horror film characters “the vampire has proved throughout each decade that its on screen presence truly is immortal” (Karg, Spaite, & Sutherland 174). From the “suave debonair, tail-coated” Dracula to the “rat like appearance” of Count Orlock, early vampire films like Dracula or Nosferatu created the vampire that still appears in modern media (Karg, Spaite, & Sutherland 177). Bela Leguosi’s 1931 Dracula was “readily mimicked or slightly altered in many future vampire films” (Karg, Spaite, & Sutherland 190). For example, Dracula was “slightly altered” when Lee played the part as a vampire who was “tall, dark, and [had an] exotically handsome physique”, transformed a monster into a “shrewd, sexual icon” (Karg, Spaite, & Sutherland 190-191). On the contrary, Willem Dafoe played the Court Orlock character spot on in Shadow of the Vampire (Karg, Spaite, & Sutherland 195). Even Cushing’s portrayal of Van Helsing as an “agile and athletic” slayer leaves audiences feeling “safe and protected” which was imitated when Hugh Jackman captured the same character years later (Karg, Spaite, & Sutherland 191).
ReplyDeleteEven though the similarities are interesting to look at, I think seeing how vampires transformed over the years from the early versions is also captivating. If we take England’s Hammer Films into consideration, they gave us the first blonde vampire and the first female vampire as main characters during the 1960s (Karg, Spaite, & Sutherland 181). Later, movie goers are given a vampire who has “no aversion to sunlight” in Blade (Karg, Spaite, & Sutherland 196). Even more unexpected was the emergence of vampires in comedies like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Once Bitten, and one of my all time favorites, My Best Friend is a Vampire—when a young “Dr. Wilson” was drinking blood, not taking it (House pun intended).
Why do we watch horror movies if we know we will probably cover our eyes or hide behind the blanket? The fact I think we like when our heart races a little or when the hairs stand up on the back of our necks. I have to regress back to the idea of escaping in films because when it comes down to it we watch sad movies to cry, we watch funny movies to laugh, and we watch horrors movies because we actually do like going “Ahh!” when something goes “Boo!”
Entertainment through the arts has always been a way for people to express and explain things. Especially effective are the medias of theatre and motion pictures, and for some time now, the fan favorite has been the genre of horror. Horror conceptualizes what we always question. It’s natural for humans to ponder things that can’t and don’t have a simple answer. The main characters of such provide opportunities to give those questions an answer through something that could be as potentially real as we all are. The complex character of the vampire has always been a horror go to. And there are few better examples that have paved the way for the horror genre and supernatural than Nosferatu and the 1931 version of Dracula.
ReplyDeleteNosferatu is generally considered the first true adaptation of Bram Stoker’s Dracula. In order to attempt to appease copyright infringement, the names were changed and a few details altered. However, what is most distinct about this version is the portrayal of the main vampire, Count Orlock was rat like and earned the who played him, Max Schreck the nickname “the unblinking” (177). The film also continued to portray the vampire as a devilish being, one that should disgust and terrify always. Count Orlock is a “shocking amalgam of preternatural predator and subversive sexual deviant. Max Schreck as Count Orlock is, quite simply, a terrifying monster by all account” (210). The continuation of such a repulsive creature can be seen in many more modern vampire adaptations. A great example would be the vampires from the 1990’s television series Buffy the Vampire Slayer. There, the vampire shown are shriveled, sharp toothed, blood sucking vermin, and quite possibly a descendent of Count Orlock himself.
A new concept is revealed in the 1931 version of Dracula. Here, we are presented with the idea that vampires and other supernatural creatures need to create a façade in order to function amongst other living things. There is hope for them to roam within society that is if their secret is kept. This concept has been continued in many supernatural sensations and vampire hits. Two primes examples are that of the Cullen family in Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight and the vampires that also exist in the previously mentioned Buffy series. Both can mingle with society because they can hide their differences; the Cullen’s often move, where Buffy’s vampires have the ability to transform their appearances to appear normal unless they are about to feed. Part of this transformation and adaptation for society that is crucial for vampires is completely dependent on their appearance. This concept is an evolution through many vampire characters but its origin can be found in the ’31 version of Dracula. This take swings vampires from scary to awesomely alluring. They can fascinate and entrance with their dangerous and delicious good looks. Just another attribute that makes these characters completely entertaining. It is this vampire that you love to hate so much it scares you.
We can directly credit both of these early supernatural, vampire focused works for helping to create the vampire we see in the media today. Both portrayals of these characters have helped inspire the possibilities and continue us to be shocked, scared and entertaining and enamored with everything in the horror and supernatural entertainment world.
Horror films have been so popular over the years due to the instilment of fear. People want to know about the unknown. They want to figure out the mystery between life and death and they want the answers to the unexplainable. “Horror films have a rich history featuring a wide range of tales that prey upon the innate human curiosities… (174)” The uncertainties are what leave us guessing and wanting to find out more, even if it scares us. Nesferatu was considered to be “engaging and utterly frightening in its time, and remains so to this day. (176)” This was due in part to the appearance of Count Orlock. In comparison to the “suave, debonair, tail-coated Dracula”, Orlock stays true to the folklore vampire.
ReplyDeleteThe ability to make a once vile looking creature into an everyday person is “in many ways far more frightening than his being monstrous, blood thirsty savage. (181)” This rose suspicion that anyone could be a vampire and that they could walk among us, developing a fear in the character. This relation with the role of the vampire hooked people into the idea that they really exist, not just in myths and scary stories. Those old folklores became visuals on the big screen and caused audiences to decide whether to believe it or not. More success from the vampires and other supernatural didn’t only come from horror films. The characters crossed over and landed in other genres such as sci-fi, comedy and western. “The sixties and seventies also marked the beginnings of vampires on television…Vampires were now slinking directly into our living rooms –and audiences loved it. (185)”
Nosferatu depicted Count Orlock as a grotesque, rat-like monster. The producers of Dracula didn’t follow suit, instead Deane and Balderston revamped Stoker’s “somewhat ghoulish figure to a well-spoken, impeccably dressed, parlor vampire. (190)” The changes the two directors made to the character of Dracula are still prevalent today. “Ultimately, it was Deane and Balderston’s creative transformations that helped create the screen savvy vampire we know today, one that audiences across the decades can relate to. (181)” Lugosi’s Dracula in 1931 then followed the successful transformation of the vampire and became Universal Pictures’ highest grossing film of that year.
The vampire wasn’t the only role that was revamped; the vampire hunter also went through alterations as well. Actor Peter Cushing excelled in playing Van Helsing numerous times and displayed “the perfect combination of gentle but obsessed intellect, he brought to the character a physical presence. Agile and athletic… (191)” Cushing added another dimension to the role that has been used over and over in films to follow.
Technology also became a large factor in making horror films popular. The fascination with “things that go bump in the night (174)” enhanced by special effects and realistic features can really make movies more terrifying. The setting of the movie even plays a role in how effectively horrific the film is. Placing a fictional character in a real place, for example, Transylvania, makes it “entirely more surreal, mesmerizing, and terrifying. (174)”
(1/2)
ReplyDeleteIn a column written for the New York Times, filmmaker Guillermo del Toro and author Chuck Hogan offer a reason why vampires continue to mystify the human mind:
“The vampire may originate from a repressed memory we has as primates… One seminal myth might have featured our ancestors as primitive beasts who slept in the cold loam of the earth and fed off the salty blood of the living… Monsters… are invoked by our individual and collective needs. Today… we feel the need to seek their cold embrace.”
There is something primitive and visceral about vampires, something that isn’t clearly defined by any one medium. While literature provided the earliest renditions of the vampire, be it through Polidori’s “The Vampyre” and Stoker’s “Dracula”, it was in film that audience members not only realized the world inhabited by those creatures but also managed to see a representation of the creature himself – the prince of darkness, the master of the creatures of the night, the charming, sensual, evocative and charming Dracula himself… or the vampire race inspired (or seeded, in some legends) by him.
So alluring is the charm of creating films inhabited by vampires that the first such film actually came about in 1896, in the form of the French short Le manoir du diable (Karg 176), during the infancy of modern film as we know it. It is now the year 2011 and vampires still continue to propagate our cinema: playing in a theater near you is the Colin Farrell starrer “Fright Night”, coming soon is the much-anticipated “Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 1”. If it is assumed that vampires have been in cinema in every decade of film, 2011 marks the 13th such continuous decade where cinemagoers have been treated with vampire films.
Films like the Max Schreck starrer “Nosferatu” and Bela Lugosi’s “Dracula” are considered timeless because of the sheer influence they have exerted in modern vampiric cinema. In “Nosferatu”, the idea of the gentleman vampire is obliterated by Count Orlock, who is “positively grotesque and void of the social graces” we have seen with vampires, such as Count Dracula himself (Karg 178). Even if “Nosferatu” was based on Stoker’s novel, it was different in its embracing of the vampire’s predatory presence (Karg 178). Lugosi’s “Dracula”, on the other hand, helped usher in the “well-spoken, impeccably dressed, parlor vampire” (Karg 190), which actor Lugosi portrayed in a style considered “almost balletic” (Karg 188). The movie itself gave rise to the idea of the prince of darkness “could appear as a cultured, domesticated human”, which Karg concludes is “far more frightening than his being a monstrous, bloodthirsty savage” (Karg 181). “Dracula” gave the modern aristocratic look to the vampire, which was later imitated heavily by others such as Christopher Lee, and allowed the world to glimpse at a vampire who wasn’t merely a man undead, but could change shape at will to a variety of creatures, while speaking in a heavy accent and avoiding sunlight at all times (according to Karg 213). In modern vampire tales, the transformation to a creature is often downplayed, and the aristocracy has been replaced by enigma, but many of the themes continue. Both Lestat de Lioncourt and Louis de Pointe du Lac from “Interview With the Vampire” speak in Cajun or southern accents and are implied to be southern aristocracy. “Twilight” features Edward, who avoids sunlight to make sure he doesn’t glitter but also comes across immediately as mysterious and enigmatic, if not entirely aristocratic. The “Blade” movies feature Wesley Snipes as a half-vampire vampire hunter who’s biggest strength emanating from his half-human side is his ability to walk out in the sunlight, unlike his vampire brethren. And in “Bram Stoker’s Dracula”, Dracula is Vlad the Impaler, old Hungarian king of legend, with an accent almost impossible to understand.
(2/2)
ReplyDeleteDel Toro and Hogan state, “the vampire emphasizes the eternal in us… the promise of something everlasting, something truly eternal, holds a special allure”. Vampires aren’t simply considered monsters out to suck the blood of humans. They are more than just immortal creatures. In fiction, and in movies, vampires are the personifications of the ultimate mystery: they are able to live eternally yet they are dead; they are able to survive mortal attacks, yet need mortal blood to survive; they are able to defy the laws of human limitations, yet cannot even venture out into the sun without consequence. The vampires are humans and yet they are something more, something beyond, something that transcends the mortal and the imagination. In “True Blood”, the vampire Bill explains to Sookie that he believes the existence of vampires, their very biology, is magic for he cannot understand how any of it works. Vampires are the supernatural, personified.
Supernatural creatures, especially Vampires, have been a staple in movies since the early days of cinema. Audiences throughout the world have been drawn to theaters for decades to watch the directors and stars of the day attempt their retelling of an age old story. However, many of these portrayals of Vampires in cinema rely heavily on the templates created by Nosferatu (1922) and Dracula (1931).
ReplyDeleteOne of the main characteristics that future vampires adopted from Nosferatu is their predatory instincts. According to Everything Vampire Book “ with only a few noted exceptions, the sliver screen vampire will always be a predator at heart, regardless of his or her beliefs or revulsions, and that is clearly demonstrated in Nosferatu” (178) True, there aren’t any Vampire equivalents to Casper, but what else did future movie vampires borrow from the monsters of early cinema?
In the film Dracula (1931) audiences see a vampire who can transform into bats, wolves, mist and dust for the first time, traits that have been seen throughout vampire film history. We also see a creature “was a preternatural malfeasance who could appear as a cultured, domesticated human” for the first time on film. The duplicity in this character trait of vampires proves especially frightening to audiences even today. However, it was the 1927 play based on the novel Dracula that “in regard to physical appearance and also to Stokers storyline and characters set a precedent for many cinematic works to come.”
One reason why supernatural creatures have remained popular throughout decades of cinema has to do with the essential experience of seeing films. Since people first began seeing films in theaters they are not only going to see the story portrayed on screen, but they are also going as an escape from their everyday lives. This was especially evident in the early days of cinema when movie theaters were one of the cheapest most readily available forms of entertainment around. What supernatural creatures in films do is further invoke a disconnect with reality that movie goers are seeking when at the theater (or watching at home).
Another reason why horror and supernatural films have remained popular is largely due to the loyalty of its fan base. Because individuals who like vampire literature are likely to see vampire movies (and the same can be said for Warewolves or another monster). Also, one of the main factors that draws people to movies is the knowledge that the film they are about to see will be good (or at least enjoyable). It is this principle that explains why sequels, prequels and the like are so common and financially successful. The success of movies with common supernatural characters like Vampires, whether they are like Edward Cullen or Nosferatu, Warewolves, or even Zombies, can be explained by the same principle. Even if fan of supernatural films does not know the exact plot of, or who stars in a movie, however they know it is some kind of vampire narrative, they would be likely to see that movie simply because they already enjoy ONE aspect of that film without having even stepped foot inside the theater.
This trend with Vampire films began with Universal in the nineteen thirties and forties but it became the most popular through the work of London’s Hammer Film Productions. They were the first company to continually reformat Vampire narratives into new stories. However, it was not the constant production of new vampire films which led to the success of Hammer, this tactic actually worked against them in the long run. There success came from the overall quality and entertainment value of the films.
Lindsay Walker
ReplyDeleteThe genre of a film is a very telling piece of information. In being aware of a film’s genre people can very readily infer what it has to offer. A comedy, for example, will give audiences a good laugh, whereas a drama will be serious, intense and quite possibly sad. Each genre offers audiences a specific type of entertainment, which they expect and even rely on. Just as any other genre, horror films provide a specific experience. When people watch a horror film they expect to see things that bring out their biggest fears, or things of a haunting nature- they count on being scared.
It can be assumed that people have their genre preferences. Different genres attract different types of people. Not everyone like every genre type just as not everyone likes every type of sport or every type of music. That being said, it can be assumed that not everyone enjoys horror films. These films may not be liked by all people but, people of all ages and background seem to be intrigued by there content. Though it may be a very fine line, there is arguably a difference between like and intrigue. You don’t necessarily have to like something in order to have feelings of curiosity, and interest about it. This applies perfectly to this interest we see in horror films. It’s as though people can’t resist the temptation. They are continuously attracted to all the fear and eeriness that horror films provide. This theory is supported by the “Everything Vampire Book” when it states, “Horror films have a rich history featuring a wide range of tales that prey upon the innate human curiosities surrounding all things that hock, creep, scream howl, bite, vanish, fly mutate, and generally move to scare the knickers off us. The true creative genius of the horror industry is that audiences of all ages and generations will never cease becoming obsessed with things that go bump in the night” (Karg, 174). People have this overwhelming desire to watch horror films because of their compelling content. Their ability to pull you into the depths of their content, to make the hair on your arms stand, the muscles in your body tighten, and your stomach to curl is all part of the lure. Watching a horror film especially one about vampires, werewolves, etc in a sense gives people the opportunity to learn about a whole different realm.
Although a constant intrigue through the years, the portrayal of vampires and vampire slayers in the media has changed over time, as is the case with any phenomenon. They remain a point of interest among viewers but each new era and generation has something new to offer to the representation and portrayal of these creatures. What we today think of as vampires may not be an exact replica of the original images that were created in Nosferatu (1924) and Dracula (1931) but apparent similarities and comparisons can still be made. Specific traits and characteristics have maintained their presence and significance even while being passed down from generation to generation. For example, our textbook explains how the Deane/ Balderston version of Dracula chose to make some changes however, “their revamping of the Count in regard to physical appearance and also to Stoker’s storyline and characters set a precedent for many cinematic works to come, beginning with Lugosi’s 1931 Dracula” (Karg, 180). This excerpt explains that although Deane and Balderston made variations to their version of Dracula, they still followed some of the traditional plot and characteristics. Their creation was then passed on and used as a staple in Lugosi’s Dracula, and so on. It is in a sense, a ripple effect. Each story about vampires and vampire slayers has its own twist but they all maintain some of the original attributes we see in the originals like Nosferatu and Dracula.
Every person looks to find something different out of a movie. Be it side straining laughter; tear jerking romance, disastrous tragedy, on the edge of your seat suspense or heart attack horror. We all are searching for something. In the
ReplyDeleteEverything Vampire Book Kern discusses the horror genre.
“Horror films have a rich history featuring a wide range of tales that prey upon the innate human curiosities surrounding all things that shock, creep, scream, howl, bite, vanish, fly, mutate, and generally move to scare the kickers off us. The true creative genius of the horror industry is that audiences of all ages and generations will never cease becoming e=obsessed with things that go bump in the night. That said, the possibilities for creating and integrating myths and monsters is that like many other genres born of literature and real-life events, a touch of imagination---and in the case of modern films, a dose of computer-enhanced graphics---can become entirely surreal, mesmerizing, and terrifying (Karg, 174).
But why are we so obsessed with being scared and the unknown? Well I believe it has to do with the fact that we want to feel every emotion without having anything bad actually happen to us. We want to feel the heartbreak when the old woman and man die at the end of the notebook, the fear when jigsaw traps his prey, the happiness when Ashton Kutcher and Jennifer Garner fall in love at the end of Valentines day, without actually having to expend the effort or feel the actual pain. But there is one lasting character that has been all over the media since the beginning of the film era, the Vampire. Not the modern day I sparkle in the light and will love you eternally vampire. The I VANT to suck your blood vampire. The mesmerizing, entrancing, killer, this all started with Nosferatu and Dracula.
Nosferatu was not the suave vampire we are so accustomed to seeing. He was the true folklore vampire. The devious, heinous, villain.
“Truly ugly in his conception---due in no small part to the film’s art director Albin Grau---the unblinking Count has an almost ratlike appearance, with long clawlike fingers, a bald head, hollowed face, pointed ears, exceptionally long rodent-type fangs, and a legion of devoted rats that would give Willard a run for his money. By all accounts, Orlock is positively grotesque and void of the social graces we associate with the classic drawing room vampire. When Orlock’s English real estate representative, Thomas Hutter, accidentally cuts his thumb with a knife, for example, Orlock moves to actually lick the blood from Hutter’s wound. It’s a moment that truly sets up the animalistic reality of Orlock’s affliction (Karg 178).
ReplyDeleteDoes that sound like the vampire of the 21st century? I think not. One thing I found so interesting about Nosferatu was the animal followers. It made me think of the Anita Blake Vampire Hunter series. Each master vampire in that series has a set of animals that do their bidding; Nikolas had the rats and rat shapeshifters, Jean-claude has his wolves. This is a common trait among some modern vampires. Also this is seen with wolves and vampires in the hit series Trueblood. The ex king vampire of Louisiana had an army of vampire blood addicted werewolves that would come to his every beckon call. But the vampire that all vampires as of late get most of their traits from has to be Dracula. Dracula was a debonair, handsome, entrancing man that could suck you in with his words and glances. “The very idea that Dracula was a prenatural malfeasant who could appear as a cultured, domesticated human is in many ways far more frightening than his being a monstrous, bloodthirsty savage. Ultimately, it was Deane and Balderston’s creative transformations that helped create the screen-savvy vampire we know today, one that audiences across the decades can relate to (Karg 181). Today we have the idea that vampires are just like humans with some supernatural abilities. They are just really pale, they sparkle in the sunlight or are allergic to it, they are extremely strong and cold, they have retractable fangs or very sharp teeth, and they are amazingly good in bed. Well what vampire would you rather have exist? One that just wants to suck you dry like Victoria or Russell Edgington from Twilight and Trueblood. Well? Of course we would choose the strong, killer, and fantastic lover Edward and Eric. But vampires are still those to be feared, which is why I like the fact that not all the vampires are good. Well we like to be scared, but I’m beginning to think we are flirting too closely with the monsters for our own good. What do you think?
Christine Atchinson
ReplyDeleteHorror films have been a staple in cinema because they appeal to the masses inner curiosities and frighten them. Vampires and werewolves are very sexual and erotic. They are animalistic, awakening our inner beast when we watch them. The theme of revenge is often portrayed. Revenge is a topic many people can relate to and find interesting. There is an element of danger in vampire films. There is many times so much at stake for the characters in supernatural films. The theme good versus evil is usually in vampire films, a theme that the viewers battle with in real life. Often times the special effects in horror films are so realistic that it can feel like Vampires could actually exist. Even more so, the vampires have become relatable. They blend into society, which also gives the feeling of authenticity and the possibility that vampires could be real. There is a lot of room for creativity in horror films depicting the supernatural. “While each decade would contain a host of cinematic vampire gems, they would also feature films that tested the boundaries of traditional Dracula….” (Ch. 14 pg. 185) This allows the directors to push the boundaries and find new and old ways of luring in audiences.
Nosferatu, by Friedrich Wilhelm set the standard for the portrayal of vampirism for countless movies that followed. The term “nosferatu” translates to “plague carrier”. Many stories that followed this film copied this idea that the vampire disease was actually a plague. The film has a hint of sexuality in the idea of exchanging bodily fluids will spread the plague. “…underlying sexuality was represented by the fear villagers had of Orlock and the subversive mechanism of disguising the exchange of bodily fluids with the spread of plague, a concept used by many horror and sci-fi films in later decades…” (Ch.14 p.178) What makes Nosferatu truly unique is that the vampire, Count Orlock, was not shown as a tall, dark, handsome and suave vampire, but a grotesque monster. “Truly ugly in his conception…the unblinking Count has an almost ratlike appearance, with long clawlike fingers, a bald head, hollowed face, pointed ears, exceptionally long rodent-type fangs, and a legion of devoted rats…” (Ch. 14 p.178) Nosferatu’s vampire had animalistic qualities, beyond being just a predator of humans. The film has very realistic settings, giving the audience the feeling that the Vampire epidemic could actually happen. “The choice to forgo film sets in favor of on-location shooting—both outdoors and in authentic interiors—gives Nosferatu a distinct aura of both reality an menace.” (Ch 14. p. 178) In movies seen today, the settings are often in very authentic, like in Twilights, school cafeteria’s and classrooms, even the Cullen’s house looks like a modern house.
Dracula, by Bela Lugosi, changed the way that Vampires were portrayed. He made the vampire relateable. His vampire seemed like a normal person, a characteristic seen in the way vampires are portrayed today. “The very idea that Dracula was a preternatural malfeasant who could appear as cultured, domesticated human is in many ways far more frightening that his being a monstrous, bloodthirsty savage.” (Ch.14 pg. 180) Another way that the vampire blended in was that he was good looking. “Christopher Lee is the quintessential Count Dracula; his statuesque appearance coupled with impeccable British mannerisms and lithe good looks make him the perfect immortal. With smoldering and undeniable sexuality, and well-portrayed bloodlust…” (Ch. 15 pg.189) Lugosi’s Dracula is a renaissance man, he’s good looking and charming. He is what men want to be and what women want in a man. Thus a vampire as a sex symbol became a staple thanks to Dracula.
The film medium has seen various types of acceptance since the beginning of the industry. Many have mixed feelings about the way they feel about any particular kind of film. Horror films are the one genre in the industry that has been able to maintain a steady approval rating amongst its audience. Personally, I don’t like horror films however; I can see why people are so intrigued by them and why this particular medium has appealed to such a wide audience. In Chapter 14 of The Everything Vampire explains how people’s fascination with horror films will never stop becoming obsessed with these particular kinds of film. The possibilities of creating new tales that will intrigue people are endless (174). These films continue to grab the attention of people of all ages because our curiosity goes beyond what anyone can explain. Although many of these films can question as to whether they are accurate about the unexplained they can still be captivating.
ReplyDeleteBram Stoker’s Dracula has set the stage and standards for horror stories. Stoker’s Dracula immortalized the characteristics vampires have in every form of literary work. Before Stoker’s novel vampires were one of those creatures that people didn’t care much about. Vampires were stereotyped as demonic blood sucking, unfriendly creatures that people just wanted to stay away from. Stoker changed that because his novel gave people the curiosity of trying to find out more about these people. Vampires went from being disgusting to being handsome and sexually appealing to people particularly the female audience of all ages. This novel allowed for creativity and the desire to come up with more interesting stories while at the same time borrowing ideas from Stoker’s book.
According to The Everything Vampire book, the silent film Nosferatu is an authorized version of Stoker’s novel because the film producers did little to change the storyline of the film from that on Dracula (176). Unlike in the novel the Count in this movie is repulsive man with a rat like appearance that was considered more a social void in in his village. “By all accounts, Orlock is positively grotesque and void of all social graces we associate with the classic drawing room vampire” (178). This portrayal of Dracula was very common because of the stereotypical views of vampires. The demonic inhuman like stigma of vampires made it possible for people to think that these creatures are the product of a supernatural force that made them what they are. “Count Orlock also represented a scorned of society—a vile creature locked away in a remote run-down Transylvanian castle” (178). In this film the director manages to keep the Count true to the folklore and beliefs about vampires. This film paved the way for other creative interpretations of Stoker’s novel.
In 1931 the producer Bela Lugosi gave life to the first official version of Dracula that very closely resembled Stoker’s book (189). This portrayal of Dracula was important because it opened the plot to endless possibilities of changing the vampire like perception rather than just going by the typical folklore. Lugosi ultimately ended up selling the rights to Dracula to Universal Pictures making it possible for others to allow their creativity develop more vampiric stories (189). “What many consider be a crucial point in the evolution of Stoker’s original vampire are the changes Deane and Balderston made… Ultimately, it was the their transformation of the count and Lugosi’s portrayal that set the tone for all Dracula’s that would follow” (190).
These more evolved and sophisticated versions of Dracula have allowed us to view and change the way vampires were perceived before Stoker’s novel and after. They have made it possible for people find some sort of gratification when they are fed stories that intrigue them.
Elisabeth Keasler said...
ReplyDeleteIts no shock that filmmakers dating all the way back to the early 1800’s have made a lasting impression on its audience. I’m very sure that there are even people that exist today without knowing the true reason why vampires the big-screen can bring an audience in so well. The Everything Vampire Book says it well in chapter 1. Bloodsucking cinema hinges on fear. It’s also “an industry like non else that all ages and generations will never cease becoming obsessed with things that go bump in the night.” (174) This as is true for the real world as it in cinemas. Karg stresses in Chapter 14 noting that with the characteristics cinematic vampires of creeping, biting, mutating etc, they are truly that only immortal being. But what does this industry do so extremely well? Just as the sexy vampires lure you in to their realm of the world, the horror genre desires to welcome you to world of the unknown. Something that you must come back to, to get more but that you cant get in the real world. Nonetheless, its provides a “bubble” for audiences to make use of their imagination to escape the planet in a sense.
Most importantly, we must note how Bram Stoker’s Dracula has set the stage in establishing the hallmark qualities that still exist today. As Karg goes on to describe it in the Everything Vampire Book, there is also the silent but deadly Nosferatu. “The director was given to overuse the special effects which proved to be engaging and utterly frightening in its time, and remains so to this day.” (176) Also “the underlying sexuality was represented by the fear villagers had of Orlock and submersive mechanism of disguising the exchange of bodily fluid with the spread of the plague.” (178) These films however, led to evolution of the bloodsucking vampire and life light of the genre of horror films in general.
These films have created “the screen savy vampire we know today that audiences across decades can relate to.” This is the most important thing that Karg explains in chapter 14 because this proves to you just the way the new vampire cinema clearly reflects the old vampire folklore. Karg even notes that the renditions of Dracula is that their revamping of the Count in regard to physical appearance and also to Stokers storyline set a precedent for what’s to come. We can take Twilight and True Blood for example to recognize how these main characters come across as normal human beings, living a normal life in society. Well there you go, that’s exactly what Dracula does. He is really just the normal average businessman, but when daylight goes down he becomes a bloodsucking vampire of Transylvania. In sense, like Karg says, the preternatural malfeasant who could appear as a cultured, domesticated human.
So with no doubt, we must give Dracula the lights of it all. It all dates back to Bram Stoker for the reason we have the supernatural we do today. He has allowed for a new realm of the vampire world to exist, and allow for all ages to crave it. We can also thank, production companies like Universal and Hammer Films and also characters such as Frank Langella and Bela Lugosi. “ It must be said that every actor and actress who’s portrayed a vampire has brought some measure of charm and idiosyncrasy to his or her undead alter ego of the silver screen vampirism.” (188) Whether it be man or monster, warewolves or zombies they each have probably charmed you into wanting more.