Clawing their way out from literature, vampires have been prowling through art and media for ages. Amongst werewolves, ghosts and zombies, they’ve become synonymous with the horror genre, and rightfully so. What other monster can appear as a fanged incarnation of evil for one second and a silly, little bat the next? Don’t let their centennial reign of fear deceive you; writers and filmmakers have vastly altered vampires since their nights on the pages of novels. With new vampire films still rising up, grab your wooden stakes and pour a glass of holy water, let’s creak open Dracula’s coffin and examine the evolution of vampires through the years.
While vampires have been lurking in folklore for thousands of years, they first appeared in literature just two centuries ago. John Polidori’s “The Vampyre ” from 1819 introduced vampires as deceptive aristocrats, hiding among humans during the day and luring them in for a meal at dusk. Polidori also worked as a personal physician for the poet, Lord Byron, who verbally abused Polidori for the summer they spent together. “The Vampyre” is a clear allegory to Byron’s abusive relationship with Polidori where he expressed his resentment while depicting his manipulative, Byronic vampire. This was a substantial turning point in the genre of vampires, as they’d previously only been thought of as rabid, demonic beasts. Nevertheless, “The Vampyre” is not nearly the most prominent vampire tale in literature; you must account for the Count.
In London of 1897, Bram Stoker dipped his pen in blood (he used a typewriter) and created the renowned character, Count Dracula. “Dracula” is likely the most influential vampire-narrative we’ve yet to see. Stoker used fictional newspaper articles, diary entries and letters to lead readers through Dracula’s journey from Transylvania to England. Characters like Abraham Van Helsing, a vampire slayer, and Robert Renfield, Dracula’s loyal familiar (a vampire’s human assistant), that are now staples in the vampire community first debuted in “Dracula.”
With Stoker’s character currently in the public domain, Dracula has a relatively common role in pop culture. “Sesame Street” can name a character “Count Von Count” and “Hotel Transylvania” can have “Drac” as their main character and get off scot-free. However, if you travel back a century to Berlin, a different copyright process must occur. Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau’s “Nosferatu” from 1922 doesn’t share Stoker’s title for a reason. After being refused permission by the Stoker estate to adapt his novel to the screen, Murnau simply changed some names. He switched his title to “Nosferatu,” (a Romanian word meaning “vampire”) and renamed characters like Renfield and Count Dracula to Herr Knock and Count Orlok, respectively. Even so, as any English student knows, paraphrasing without due credit is still plagiarism. Although Stoker passed a decade earlier, his wife, Florence Stoker, successfully sued the studio that produced the film. The court ordered all prints of “Nosferatu” to be destroyed, but I wouldn’t be writing this if that had happened. Since the film had already gained immense popularity worldwide, Orlok still dies today.
One adaptation of Stoker’s writing permanently impacted the perception of vampires in an unintended way. When Tod Browning’s “Dracula” cast Bela Lugosi as their villain in 1931, the studio realized his looks may’ve attracted another audience for their film, as most of Lugosi’s Dracula fans were women. This impact may seem small, but had a major effect in Hollywood. There was suddenly a more charming vampire with an iconic Transylvanian accent, appearing like any other human. I’m not saying Lugosi is the reason Robert Pattinson can play a vampire, but yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. After Lugosi, there was a shift in how vampires were depicted. We began seeing actors like John Carradine in 1944 and Christopher Lee in 1958 play the Count (not the only Count he’s played, “Star Wars” fans). Lugosi caused Dracula, and furthermore, vampires as a whole, to stop being portrayed as hideous demons.
Stoker-based films fittingly have a more literary storyline that can seem unrealistic to how vampires would exist today. The most accurate to the original text is Francis Ford Coppola’s “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” from 1992 in which Gary Oldman plays the traditional, sinister nobleman. Films like this take the fiction of vampires very seriously, but that isn’t to say there aren’t realistic interpretations of vampires in entertainment. Some take the route of comedy, pointing out the absurdities in vampires actually living among us. Both the series and film, “What We Do in the Shadows” are hilarious examples of this. Directed by Taika Waititi, they follow a group of centuries-old vampires navigating through the 21st century. Another comedy is the 2023 film, “Renfield” which surprised fans as a sequel to Browning’s “Dracula.” By replacing Lugosi with Nicolas Cage and focusing on his familiar, it’s an amusing testament to how Dracula has changed over the century. There are still realistic vampire films that maintain the drama of classic horror. Park Chan-wook’s “Thirst” from 2009 presents a priest struggling to suppress his urges as he transforms into the undead creature. Ana Lily Amirpour’s “A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night” from 2014 shows a vampire stalking men who believe they’re above the law, proving them otherwise. Vampire movies have advanced past the confinements of Stoker’s writing, and they continue to push that barrier further.
Something often forgotten when discussing Stoker’s novel is the blatant antisemitism reflected in the main character. His physical features alone (a hooked nose, pointed ears and bushy eyebrows) are references to anti-semitic caricatures. Dracula’s immigration is also an allegory for Victorian England’s fear of Jewish people. When Dracula wants to move to England where he can feast easier, he gets a proprietor to meet him at his castle to purchase an estate near London. Soon afterwards, Dracula sneaks onto a merchant ship headed for England, surviving off the crew until arrival. The rest of the novel shows women across London mysteriously dying in the night, only two puncture wounds on their neck and their body drained completely of its blood. Dracula’s presence is presumed to be a disease infecting the good (Christian) people of London. If none of that proves Stoker may have had more in mind than writing a goofy horror story, there’s a line where Dracula’s cargo is described as having a revolting smell, that of Jerusalem. This isn’t to say all Dracula adaptations also have roots in antisemitism, but it’s important to bring up when discussing vampire history.
Vampire stories are some of the earliest, yet most enduring horror stories in film. “Nosferatu” alone is still being remade. Robert Eggers is currently working with A24 to remake the film for release in 2024. Vampire movies have had a pretty consistent run for a century now. Undoubtedly, they don’t all stick to Polidori’s image—they’ve evolved greatly over time. Stoker introduced the idea that they cast no reflection and can transform into bats. Murnau instigated their weakness against sunlight. They were first given superspeed by Anna Rice in “Interview with the Vampire” from 1976, turned into a movie in 1994. Vampire stories are constantly getting remastered, adapted or simply influenced throughout the media. Two facts remain unchanged, no vampires remain in Romania and Dracula never drinks… wine.
