Bring the Bats Back to the Tower

Lamenting the Loss of Interesting Vampires in Film

Back in my imaginary play days, executing a perfect vampire snarl was important. One evening was particularly triumphant when down in my friend’s basement (our headquarters of method acting from the ages of 5-13) I managed to frighten her little sister bad enough to snap her out of character. Your teeth, she told me. You really look like a vampire. Hell yes. It was the stuff of big black cobweb dreams.

Maybe it’s because I’m descended from Transylvanian dwellers, but I cannot remember ever not being obsessed with vampires. My dedication over the last two decades have led through some pretty sweet ups, but mostly shame spiraling lows. If there’s one thing an undeadophile learns over the years, it’s that mainstream culture and even subculture doesn’t actually understand what’s cool about vampires.

The most blazingly horrific example of this misperception is evident in film. The last great vampire film, in my opinion, was Interview with the Vampire (1994). The last sweet vampire film was the first Blade (1998). I don’t have any issues with Kate Beckinsale personally, but the Underworld (2003, 2006) flicks blow. Only guys like those movies, and it has nothing to do with the actual vampires. I can’t remember what happened in John Carpenter’s Vampires (1998) and Van Helsing (2004) was the saddest example of 21^st Century CGI I’d seen up to that point, not to mention Kate Beckinsale embarrassed herself again with her sesame street Romanian accent. I actually own Dracula 2000 (2000). It entertains me to no end; Gerard Butler is a hot Scottish bastard, and it contains one of the funniest sex scenes I have ever seen, but the film is, well, a flick.

In terms of literature, I totally bought into the Vampire Chronicles, but I am well aware that Anne Rice missed her shit plenty of times. At her best, though, she created some of the most interesting immortals to hit the streets. It’s her fault that I expect a certain amount of depth from vampires, but Hollywood’s only concern is how high a bloodsucker can kick in latex. Hollywood’s startling lack of imagination is evident in several film genres, but when it comes to vampires they have totally crapped out on ideas. Vampires in leather and latex were cool, for two movies, but now it is mind numbingly boring. Why would an immortal choose to wear two of the most uncomfortable materials in creation (aside from polyester and 100% wool)? And don’t get me started on vampires using guns, though this isn’t as annoying as female vampires being delegated to plummeting neck lines and stilettos (stilettos are an affliction affecting many action heroines of the last five years or so, but that’s a whole other complaint).

Any sense of artistic purpose has long since fled from vampire cinema. I’m not really sure where it went, but I am sure it has to do with the fact that in this day and age when things are scientifically explained away, vampires are not taken seriously, and when a subject is dismissed like that, no one takes the care to present it with any real style. With the movie industry’s penchant for book adaptations and remakes, I’d even be grateful for another version of Dracula.
Scratch that, Gary Oldman needs to play another vampire. Yes! Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992) is rife with issues, but not all of the casting is bad, and there are some amazing visuals. Stunning visuals are key in vampire films (see also: Interview with the Vampire). One of my favorite scenes ever in all of horror cinema takes place near the end of the film when Dracula is in bat-like form. He is confronted by Van Helsing and the other men, crucifix in his face: “Look what your God has done to me,” he utters before stomping his foot and sending the cross into flames. The Count then backs up into a closet and into the darkness where only the red of his eyes are visible. When he steps back out, the shape of his form is evident, but there are only rats. He opens his arms, and then the rats all drop to the floor and flee the room.

The Good Old Days:

Coppola’s adaptation is hands down far more amusing than the actual book. Stoker cannot write, and his one famous book is only good for one read. Pumping it up with nipples and a werewolf raping a half-conscious redhead is just something you have to do to get things snapping. But really, it’s Oldman who captains that ship. His Romanian is flawless, his sinister cackle inimitable, and his chameleon-like switch from old Count to young is mind blowing. Which brings me to one of my main points, vampires should be played by talented actors. Hell, playing a vampire can make an actor better. Lestat is one of the few times Tom Cruise ever disappeared into a role, and it made the world a better place. I’ve never longed for Tom Cruise more than when I sat through the heart piercingly awful adaptation of Queen of the Damned (2002). As far as I’m concerned Aaliyah made one film (Romeo Must Die, 2000). How a group of people could take arguably one of the best books in the Vampire Chronicles and turn it into a holocaust of poor decision-making is beyond me. Interview is a shining example of an adaptation gone good, and if Tom Cruise can put on a blonde wig what the hell is Stuart who-the-hell-are-you Townsend’s excuse? It’s not about being painstakingly accurate, it’s about paying attention to facts such as: Lestat having blonde hair is perhaps one of the character’s most defining characteristics. Gary Oldman wouldn’t even need a wig, he would just will his hair blonde.

Further Example of Talented Actor as Vampire: Klaus Kinski in Herzog's "Nosferatu the Vampyre"

But back to film, and the interesting vampires NOT showing up. Currently there are two upcoming vampire flicks I am tracking, as yet undecided as to whether I can stomach seeing either in theatres. In December the Will Smith vehicle, I Am Legend will arrive. Having not actually read the 1954 novel, I cannot yet comment on how much it’s been destroyed, but the use of computer effects in the preview scares me. Can Smith be as funny as Charleton Heston was in Omega Man, 1971 (a half-assed adaptation)? Can he be better? I can only pray the appearance of the undead is not too embarrassing. Also on the way is 30 Days of Night, a comic book adaptation set for release in October. While the comic book mini series sounds interesting, the film stars Josh Hartnett, so…what it all comes down to is, I’ll probably end up reading more vampire lit than watching a new vampire flick in the upcoming year. Perhaps animation is a better home for vampires at this time.

Someone give me a film crew, a handful of good actors, dentures and fake blood. I could rock your world.