Renfield

Nicholas Cage as count Dracula, need I say more?

This was the perfect popcorn flick to start the nice weather season. Violent, action-packed, and just plain fun.

We follow Renfield, Dracula’s familiar/ servant/ assistant, but 90 years after Renfield started this job. Renfield says it has always been the same pattern, Dracula gets to full power, goes a “little overboard”, the church beats him, then Renfield has to nurse Dracula back to full power. This means they move pretty consistently. Renfield is exhausted and spends his little free time at a support group for people in co-dependent relationships.

I really enjoyed looking at the relationship through the lens of co-dependency and narcissism. It reminded me of Lego Batman, looking at the relationship between Batman and Joker through the lens of romance. It’s a unique take on an age-old concept. The two Nicholases play well off one another.

However, this isn’t a point-blank remake of other Dracula films, we also got some new characters; like that of Officer Rebecca Quincy. She is one of the few non-corrupt officers in the New Orleans Police Department, and because of this, she has been professionally knee-capped, only able to work traffic stops. The rest of the department is under the thumb of the local crime family.

Beltrami’s soundtrack doesn’t really stick out, even re-listening to it while writing this there’s no wow factor. It’s inoffensive and works as intended. The movie also uses footage from the iconic original Dracula from Universal Pictures for flashback scenes. Nicholas Hoult and Nicolas Cage are inserted into footage seamlessly with editing techniques. There is no button scene during the credits.

If you’re looking for a goofy bloody movie featuring Dracula, this is it. It’s ridiculous in the best possible way. It was exactly what the trailer promised.

Nosferatu

“Nosferatu. Does this word not sound like the death bird calling your name at midnight? Beware you never say it- for then the pictures of life will fade to shadows, haunting screams will climb forth from your hearth and feed on your blood.” This is the text that precedes the film.

Nosferatu is an unauthorized adaptation of Bram Stoker’ Dracula. The director, Murnau, purposefully changed the ending of his movie so he could say it was not the same as Dracula. Even though they changed the names of the characters and ending to prevent being sued, they still were sued and the original print was destroyed. So the version we can watch today does not have the original subtitles, as it is a version with changed subtitles. This is the movie that gives pop culture the “death by sunlight” concept for vampire mythology.

When it comes to silent films, one of the key aspects is the acting. Even if the acting is exaggerated, it is part of the charm. Over the top acting, was the norm at the time. If you’ve seen any live plays in theatres and compare it to contemporary movies, you will probably notice that the actors in the theatre tend to do more exaggerated acting compared to movies. This is so the people in the far back of the theatre can see what is happening. Now consider films, with the ability to do close ups, the over the top reactions are not really needed. The title cards give expositional information and dialogue as well as the orchestral music. Both the acting and title cards of these parts work together to help move the story along. The Nosferatu version of Dracula is different. Dracula is supposed to be suave, seductive and mysterious. Orlok is none of these, well maybe mysterious. Instead, Orlok is rat like, with beady little eyes, sharp teeth.

Nosferatu' and 96 Years of Expressionistic Nightmares - Bloody Disgusting — Count Orlok

In the end, this is the quintessential silent vampire film. If you want a short film to spice up your movie night, with a vampiric flare- why not try this German classic.

You can watch the trailer here.

Dracula

Written by Bram Stoker, Dracula is a tale told through a collection of letters, diary entries and telegrams.

I believe everyone knows the broad strokes of the story. Jonathan Harker goes to Castle Dracula, Dracula goes to England, woman are drained and turned into vampires, and Van Helsing shows up to save the day. Unsurprisingly, the novel has many more details.

Dracula is a collection of diary entries, making it is easy to pick up and read an entry and be able to put the book down when needed. When reading the novel, it made me think of Stephen King’s Carrie. A story told through newspaper clippings and other written paraphernalia. Of course it makes sense that Stephen King decided to write like Stoker, and it is a unique way to tell a story. Honestly, apart from Carrie, I can’t think of a story that does this type of narrative. I think it is an interesting stylistic choice to do a combination of diary entries, letters and telegrams. It gives the reader a more complete understanding of what is happening, but still withholds the key pieces until much later. There is a part in the story where Mina and Jonathan type up all the journal entries, telegrams, letters and put them in order~ presumably what the reader is reading now.

Some how I’ve gone this long without reading the original Dracula. I think I hyped it up to much in my head. As the TED-ed video How did Dracula become the world’s most famous vampire? explains, Dracula is the most famous vampire (even if he’s not the most popular). That made it seem like the story should have been more grandiose or something. At the same time, I quite liked the book. It was a change of pace, in both content and context. I did not dislike the story, it was just different from what I expected.

If your looking for a classic good versus evil story to transport you into a time of old castles and hand written letters with a touch of horror; try reading Dracula.

Dracula (2020 Netflix)

Vampires + period piece + good acting = a recipe for a good show?

The original Bram Stoker premise has been taken to the big screen once again, with a little twist here and there. In 1897, Count Dracula is planning his dastardly debut in Victorian England. To assist with the move, his lawyer- Johnathan Harker- has come to stay in the Castle, to help the count learn the English way of life. The show takes place after this encounter, where Johnathan has escaped and seeks refuge in a convent, trying to explain the counts dangerous intentions for the people of England.

Claes Bang, the actor playing Dracula, was a good choice. Based on the other popular incarnations of the legendary character, Claes fits the physical description to a T. The show is full of sass and witty remarks, which Claes recites with ease. There is something about his aura that feels perfectly vampiric. The costuming was superb, showing the different famous incarnations of Dracula. There was the older Dracula as portrayed by Gary Oldman in 1992’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula and probably the best known version of Dracula by Bela Lugosi in 1931. In preparation for the role, Claes watched as many Dracula Interpretations as he could. According to Wikipedia, there has been over 200 films featuring Dracula.

While watching other shows I don’t usually notice how long the season is, whereas I quickly became aware of how short the season is in Dracula. Knowing that Steven Moffat, best known for the BBC Sherlock adaptation, was a creator for the show gave me high expectations. BBC Sherlock is a wondrous piece of brevity, with only three episodes per season-even if they are all ridiculously long. I was expecting something similar for Dracula’s three episode season. My opinion drastically changed after the third episodes conclusion. Personally, I wish the season had finished after the second episode. It would have left a lot of questions and room for many theories, as well as give time to write a proper ending.

What was the most annoying was that all the ingredients for a great show were there. Dolly Wells and Claes Bang were entertaining and electric, the best scenes were when they interacted with one another. There was great special effects, without it becoming to bloody and gore-y. Wonderful costuming that pays homage to the previous incarnations of Dracula. Even the twists and turns were exciting, and added some “new blood” to the legend. It was only the ending that was odd. As if it wanted to be conclusive, in case they did not get renewed, rather than a mind boggling cliff-hanger. Dracula begs the question, is it better to write an ending “just in case”, or to through caution to the wind?

I liked it, but after thinking for so long my opinion on the conclusion has soured. I want there to be a second season, a chance for redemption, because this ending left me saying “oh, that’s all.”

It is available on Netflix, here is the trailer.