Quote:
Originally Posted by MacEachaidh
Ooh, that's an interesting heads-up, poohbear - thanks!
Not so long back I read the "sequel" to Dracula by Bram's ... ermm, great grandson, I think - Dacre Stoker. The kindest thing I can say was that it was a struggle to complete. I still really enjoy the original novel, and still feel I've yet to see a filmed version that has caught its essence of loathsomeness and creeping horror, but unfortunately modern vampire genre conventions have long since swept us past the reach of Bram Stoker's imagination. We've all become inured to the inherent terror of vampires and the violence they do to the perceived Victorian order of things; there's no real repulsion left there, and vampires are largely reduced to being gory and relying on "Boo!" moments for their movie kicks. Dacre Stoker's fledgling and (heh hehh!!) ghost-written efforts really didn't stand much of a chance of having an impact.
(For my money, the best vampire I've seen on-screen was Klaus Kinski in Polanski's remake of Nosferatu. He was both tragic and repulsive, like something you'd find under a suddenly-overturned stone. Anyone agree, or have another favourite they can recommend?)
|
I haven't see the Polanski Nosferatu, but now I think I'll have to see if I can find it online. F.W. Munarau's 1922 version has long been a favorite, and it's hard to imagine a creepier Count Orlok than Max Schreck (whose role went uncredited in the film).
Another one of my favorite vampire films is closely related:
Shadow of the Vampire, a film released in 2000 that imagines the filming of the original Nosferatu. In this fictional version, the reason there were no actor credits for the vampire in Nosferatu is because to add realism to the film, the director hired a real vampire to play the role. All went as planned until cast members begin to go missing.
In "reel" life of course, Nosferatu was Dracula by another name, and the heirs of Stoker's estate nearly succeeded in suing the film into oblivion.