Throughout history, few works have endured so long and remained so relevant to popular culture as the story of Dracula. Bram Stoker’s novel is widely regarded as the vampire story that kicked off the vampire craze in 1897, and over 100 years later, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and the Twilight series are entertainment icons, stand-outs among a host of vampire entertainment. That being said, it may be time for some variety. In a market saturated with vampires, only the truly spectacular stand out. Count Dracula is still an extraordinary villain, but it may be difficult to get modern audiences invested enough in the story to realize this. The character of Dracula himself is certainly quite interesting. In Dietz’s play, Van Helsing asserts that,
…show more content…
In the words of Wired magazine writer Thomas Langley, “There’s much more to our continued interest in supervillains than meets the eye” (par. 1). He goes on to assert that there are a number of factors that make supervillains so attractive to us. He claims that in many ways, we are envious of villains. They are powerful, they do what they want, and they don’t answer to anybody. Additionally, a good villain will highlight the hero, showcasing his or her power, wisdom, and desire for good. Dracula fits quite readily into these categories. He has an immense amount of power. Dracula gets to rampage around London controlling the minds of beautiful women and drinking their blood. Additionally, despite his aristocratic good manners, it is quite evident that Dracula doesn’t take no for an answer. It seems that he always gets what he wants. The more we explore the concept of Dracula’s villainy, the more apparent it becomes that, if productions fail to draw a large audience, the blame cannot be assigned to the writer for failing to create an appealing malefactor. I believe Steven Dietz best captures the potency of Stoker’s Dracula when he
In the words of Wired magazine writer Thomas Langley, “There’s much more to our continued interest in supervillains than meets the eye” (par. 1). He goes on to assert that there are a number of factors that make supervillains so attractive to us. He claims that in many ways, we are envious of villains. They are powerful, they do what they want, and they don’t answer to anybody. Additionally, a good villain will highlight the hero, showcasing his or her power, wisdom, and desire for good. Dracula fits quite readily into these categories. He has an immense amount of power. Dracula gets to rampage around London controlling the minds of beautiful women and drinking their blood. Additionally, despite his aristocratic good manners, it is quite evident that Dracula doesn’t take no for an answer. It seems that he always gets what he wants. The more we explore the concept of Dracula’s villainy, the more apparent it becomes that, if productions fail to draw a large audience, the blame cannot be assigned to the writer for failing to create an appealing malefactor. I believe Steven Dietz best captures the potency of Stoker’s Dracula when he