The Invisible Ray: Lugosi and Karloff go science fiction

The Invisible Ray, Universal, 1936, Bela Lugosi, Boris Karloff, Frances Drake, Frank Lawton. Directed by Lambert Hillyer. 3 stars - One of the classic 1930s Universal pairings of Karloff and Lugosi. A trailer is here.

This film is unique in that it is a science fiction film, rather than a horror film. Karloff and Lugosi are scientists who travel to Africa to find "Radium X," who Karloff has proven crashed into earth millions of years ago. 

"Radium X" is discovered, but contact with it turns Karloff radioactive, and deadly to the touch. Lugosi prepares medicine that counters the poison, but when Karloff's wife, (Drake) leaves him for an adventurer, Lawton, Karloff, going slowly insane, shirks the medicine and goes on a killing spree. Violet Kemble Cooper is creepy as Karloff's mother. 

This a post pre-code 1930s Universal chiller with Lugosi and Karloff and it lacks the more overt horror and sadism of the pair’s earlier pre-code films The Black Cat and The Raven. While not as popular today as those two earlier films, it’s still a strong film. It’s a better film than their final Universal co-starring film, Black Friday.

Lugosi plays the good character, and he shows that his acting depth went well beyond just the horror genre. Karloff is effective as the determined scientist gone mad.

Easy to buy and usually on TCM once a year.

-- Doug Gibson

Bela Lugosi produces menace, chills in Invisible Ghost

 

By Doug Gibson

Once,  I spared a paragraph on "Invisible Ghost," Bela Lugosi's first Monogram film. Ironically, it was the first Lugosi Monogram I ever saw and years ago I was rather dismissive of the film, particularly Lugosi's insane murder moments. Watching it again, as recent as last night, and comparing it to other Lugosi Monograms, I re-evaluate it as technically, the best looking Lugosi poverty-row offering of the 1940s, if not the most campy or cultish. That notice still remains with "Devil Bat," "Bowery at Midnight," and "The Ape Man."

Here's what I wrote on this blog: "THE INVISIBLE GHOST, 1941:

"Lugosi's first Monogram has a convoluted plot but benefits from above-average direction from Joseph H. Lewis. Lugosi plays a kindly man whose wife deserted him. Unbelievably, she still lives on the grounds and he goes quite mad when he catches glimpses of her. The deaths lead to the execution of one innocent man whose brother (same actor) comes to the house to seek justice. Lugosi's hypnotic walk when under the murder spell of his wife is campy but the actor also brings pathos to it. Former silent star Betty Compson plays Lugosi's estranged, insane wife."

Lewis' direction is superb, and he throws in touches that other, run of the mill cheapie directors do not do, including interesting shots from a fire place, with the flames dancing in front of the actors, and excellent forward shots of a horrified Lugosi seeing his wife Compson through the window in a storm. The acting is better, particularly black actor Clarence Muse as Evans the butler who acts with dignity, and not a Stephen Fetchit portrayal. And the film's love interest is the talented Polly Ann Young, the least successful of the sisters in Hollywood trio that included Loretta Young and Sally Blane. Also, the sets seem of better quality than an average Monogram film.

One the minus side, the script is weak and convoluted, and mildly confusing. I think quality of scripts are the biggest difference between Universal B films and poverty row offerings in the 1940s. The other distinction is depth of acting talent in the films. Also, although Lugosi is excellent in his role -- even now I see the restraint in his insane moments that I missed on my first viewing, his playing of Mr. Kessler is not a role that demands any particular expertise or trait that made Lugosi unique. For example, the role could easily have been played -- at 90 percent of Lugosi's strength -- by George Zucco.

The film has Lugosi as a usually decent man who has temporary insane moments believing his long-departed wife is living in the house. The wife, played by Compson is actually on the grounds, being cared for -- without Lugosi''s character's knowledge. However, he occasionally sees her through his house's windows. That prompts him to go into a trance and kill whomever is in his sight. Early in the film is a genuinely scary scene where Lugosi, in a murderous trance, kills a maid in her bed. Director Lewis films this superbly, with a leering Lugosi coming closer to the terrified girl on the bed, and lifting a garment as a murder weapon. A radio playing pleasant music adds to the creepiness of the scene.

One more thing to add: Compson does a very good job as Lugosi's insane wife, who wanders around the Kessler estate. The poor script offers very little in how she could manage this so consistently, but as mentioned, scripts were not a priority on poverty row.

I highly endorse "Invisible Ghost" as a strong Lugosi poverty row offering. It appropriately belongs in the top tier of the Monogram cheapies and comes the closest to looking like a Universal B offering.

NBC's Grimm: Reviewing the Pilot

 

By Joe Gibson

 

Introduction

 

Hi and welcome back to Plan9Crunch, where today our exigence is a little different than usual. Cult followings are often established over time, sometimes long after the stimulus itself has even ended. NBC’s Grimm was a show running from 2011 to 2017 that unfortunately failed to leave the same cultural impact as Buffy or Angel (despite being better than both of them), but the reason we are talking about it today is because of the recent news of a Peacock revival movie (and its small but passionate fan-base makes it the kind of cult we talk about here).

 

Lasting six seasons, it is very unlikely we will ever cover all the episodes here. Today, I will review the first episode of the show, share my thoughts on season one as a whole, and basically write to convince you to watch this show if you have not already (and even if you have, the rewatchability of this show is great, as I also hope to demonstrate).

 

Grimm is the story of Nicholas Burkhardt (David Giuntoli), a Portland cop, who realizes that he is a Grimm/Decapitare, which means he can see the Grimm’s fairy tale monsters living amongst humanity (and the traditional role of a Grimm is to decapitate or otherwise dispatch the violent monsters called Wesen). His coworkers allow the show to explore the ramifications of revealing or keeping secret this hidden knowledge about the world, the Wesen friends he makes allow for exploration of the different cultures that exist in this world, and scheming police captain Sean Renard (Sasha Roiz) demonstrates the aspects of both the criminal underworld and high society. There are a lot of moving pieces, and I will get into what I think sets this show apart from the competitors at least in regards to season one at the end of this review, but, if any of this interests you, please check the show out on Amazon Prime Video or the physical six season box set available through Walmart among other places.

 

Grimm is evidently a multimedia franchise already, as my forays into the Grimm wiki looking for trivia on the first episode led me to the discovery of multiple series of comic spinoffs, some as prequels following Marie Kessler (Kate Burton) and others are midquels about Nick and his friends as we see them in the show. The movie is not even the first time a revival concept has arisen, but, hopefully, this movie does come out. Funnily enough, Wikipedia describes the show as not only a police procedural but also “occult detective fiction.” A much clearer designation to me is urban fantasy (where fantastical elements blend with real world settings) or possibly paranormal romance (urban fantasy that focuses on love) if you gaze deep into those subplots and imagery, but the day to day episode to episode conflicts are very much procedural dramas.

 

The pilot of Grimm is the Little Red Riding story adapted to police procedural format. We have read from Little Red Riding Hood on our YouTube channel already, link at the bottom of this article. Little Red Riding is, simply put, the story of a young girl drawing the attention of a ravenous wolf that outmaneuvers her, impersonates her loved one and finally eats her. The earliest known recorded version (from Charles Perrault) simply ends there, but the version recorded by Jacob and Wilhem Grimm introduced a happier ending: a hunter figure emerges to save Little Red Riding Hood. That makes this the perfect pilot for a show about this mythical hunter of the fairy tale creatures. If there was any doubt of the inspiration, the episode begins with a quote from the tale “The wolf thought to himself, what a tender young creature. What a nice plump mouthful…” The wolf’s predatory behavior, in some versions of this tale, is sexual or purely hunger induced. The wolf’s motivations in this pilot will oscillate accordingly, where he feeds on one victim and kidnaps the other for different reasons.

 

Cold Open

 

The cold open centers on college girl Sylvie Oster jogging through a wooded region of Portland to Eurythmics’ Sweet Dreams wearing a bright red jacket. A small toy/statue distracts her, and, suddenly, a big bad wolf whizzes past to brutally murder her. We do not see much of the actual attack or the wolf itself; it is a jarring image meant to set our expectations of the show, as the shot returns to the IPod playing Sweet Dreams. The murder was quick, brutal and realistic, but the show did not revel in the grit and gore, and that describes this show exceedingly well (with the exception of a season 4 arc that is meant to be uncomfortable to watch by contrast to the rest of the show due to that arc’s heavier themes).

 

Character Establishing Moments

 

Next is our introduction to Nick and his partner Hank (Russell Hornsby, who you may know from small role in Creed II), and this is very significant in a way that it is easy to overlook. Nick has all sorts of childhood baggage that the show will later explore, but that is not our first vision of him. He has procured a ring with which to propose to his girlfriend Juliette Silverton (Elizabeth Tulloch, probably most recently known for her version of Lois Lane in the show Superman and Lois), but that connection is not the focus of the scene. 

Nick’s faithfulness contrasts Hank’s womanizing, and yet Nick’s eye does wander to Claire Coffee’s Adalind Schade. Nick justifies this by studying her personality based on her appearance and his gut (this is the playbook he will use as a cop but also as a Grimm), and he is mostly correct with his assessment: she does make money and is falling for an older man (just not a senior partner). 

 

However, she then becomes a horrifying hag in front of him, another thing that only he sees in her, seeing it instantly. Adalind is a Hexenbiest (essentially a witch), and their rivalry will be a major part of the show, but it is Nick’s fluctuating perception of her and her background that will define their rivalry over the course of the show. I do not want to spoil the character work between them, but she was Nick’s first steps into this world, and this chance meeting affects the entirety of the show from here on.

 

Nick and Hank arrive at the crime scene and then back to the station where Nick sees another Wesen and literally bumps into coworker Drew Wu (Reggie Lee). The show employs some tension when bald woman Marie Kessler brings her trailer to and breaks into Nick’s house, while Nick and Hank identify Sylvie Oster officially. When Nick finally arrives home, the scene is dark with foreboding music. Blue and red dominate the shot, while Marie sits at a table chopping a tomato, but it turns out Marie is Nick’s aunt, and Juliette is also in the kitchen. Accordingly, the colors of the scene become less hostile and more well-lit and vibrant.

 

Aunt Marie takes Nick for a walk, explaining that due to her cancer, she does not have much time left and needs to exposit to Nick about Grimms. She warns Nick that he must end things with Juliette. Notice how Juliette is treated in this episode: there is no meet-cute, Nick is introduced checking out another woman, and now whether or not the relationship will continue is up in the air. This makes for effective tension about the relationships of these characters, because we cannot rely on a sappy clichéd “love conquers all” that got set up before the actual stakes arose (like it is in so many shows). Anything could reasonably happen here, making it harder for us as the omniscient audience to predict what happens, which grounds us in Nick’s perspective, making him a singularly relatable character).

 

Suddenly, a Wesen known as Hulda (Danny Hernandez) attacks Aunt Marie and Nick, gravely wounding the former. Hulda wields a scythe and is hunting the hunter. He is part of a faction called Reapers that unfortunately drops out of the story around the end of season one. Nick finally kills Hulda with several gunshots (by season six, guns are framed as one of the most effective weapons against Wesen, but this discrepancy technically makes sense because Hulda is an elite Wesen that has already survived multiple encounters with Marie, and, honestly, the early season one Wesen that require several shots or a special gun to go down are probably still some of the strongest ones encountered by the end of the show).

 

Aunt Marie tells Nick his parents did not die in a car crash and gives him a key, explaining that Hulda’s people will be after it (even though the Reapers leave the show, other factions remain focused on attaining the key and what it unlocks, so the stakes still map to the rest of the show). They continue their conversation in the hospital. While Marie alludes to “the stories" being true, I do not think there is evidence to support that she means the Grimm Fairy Tales we know about it in our world, since she directs Nick to her trailer containing different books and different stories than what Jacob and Wilhelm published. Grimms are their own thing in this universe, but there are some later moments in the show that I can recall do imply the Brothers Grimm exist (hopefully I'll have an answer if I do another one of these).

 

Police Captain Sean Renard checks in with Nick after the latter’s shooting of Hulda, and, while I have already shown my hand about Renard’s shiftiness, it enhances the scene to know that (and it is revealed by the end of the episode anyway). The first thing we hear Renard say is that Nick chose the right person to shoot. As we will learn, Renard is aware of Reapers and the other organizations after the key (and not necessarily on the same page as them), but there is also an interest he takes in his subordinates (insisting Nick see the police psychologist and get some rest) that can communicate either a fatherly disposition or a calculating one. The subtle tension Nick has with the Captain clarifies which we should read it as, but the dichotomies we can see in the different motivations Renard acts on motivate much of the drama in the show.

 

Nick dreams of Juliette in danger from a Wesen, and that motivates him to go into Marie’s trailer where he learns the word Hexenbiest and reflects on Adalind. Some viewers have voiced confusion about the dream as foreshadowing a future event as a dropped plot point. Maybe that was the intent, but the dream itself in context seems like the clearest way to visualize Nick’s burgeoning struggle to keep her separate from this new world that will define entire seasons of this show. Can he keep her out of danger while still keeping her near? Check in to NBC every week for the answer.

 

At the precinct, progress into the investigation is poor except for the realization that the killer wears a specific boot, and we now see the owner of this boot (obviously a Wesen but specifically a Blutbad) chance upon a young girl wearing red while dressed as a postman. He begins to follow her. Meanwhile, Marie, in a coma, is revealed to have sustained many knife wounds despite being a librarian (more evidence to support the mounting case for Nick that monsters are real), but Nick has to go to the crime scene about the kidnapping.

 

Later, Renard holds a meeting in the precinct breaking down the details of the kidnapping, which sends Nick and Hank to the area to scope around the perimeter including a wooded park. Nick and Hank splitting up leads Hank to discover the girl’s backpack labeled RH for Robin Howell (or Riding Hood) and leads Nick to discover the Blutbad Monroe, who Nick tackles.

 

Monroe was originally named Eddie Monroe, but Eddie must have changed around the time that Captain Ericson changed into Captain Renard. Based on clues later in the show, it makes the most sense if Monroe’s name is Monroe Monroe, but that seems very strange. Nick is convinced that Monroe is the kidnapper because he is a Blutbad (I personally would hold off on reading cop race relations into the show until season 5, but it is a valid reading of this meeting), and, as Nick’s next steps into his journey, he ignores Juliette in order to spy on Monroe. Monroe outmaneuvers him, jumps through the window to tackle Nick…and then invites him inside for a drink.

 

 

Two Blutbaden Not One

 

It turns out Monroe is not a pedophile kidnapper but instead aware of Grimms as a bogeyman type figure from his family’s bedtime stories and religious texts. Monroe is under the impression that a family member has to die for a Grimm to activate, and that might be true, but Monroe is by no means the authority on Grimms, just a well educated “reformed Blutbad.” It surprises Nick to learn Monroe goes to church, and, actually, jumping ahead, the differences between his religion and Judeo-Christianity become important in the final arc of the show. Monroe’s backstory gets some later focus too, but the show (mostly) has a great attention to detail especially in terms of the mechanism for how Wesen recognize Grimms clearly demonstrated when Monroe first lays eyes on Nick but not explained until season 3.

 

Now that the show has revealed that the Postman, played by Tim Bagley and known as Errol Ditmarsch in a previous draft, is a different character than Monroe, we see his hideout, a moss covered cabin in the woods where he holds the little girl captive in the basement. I know Bagley primarily as the comedic character Harold Krenshaw on Monk, so the revelation of his chilling pedophile character on this show was truly surprising. Monroe explained earlier that Blutbaden lose control with the color red, and the Postman removes the girl’s red jacket to hang in a closet alongside other identical ones.

 

Monroe and Nick take great lengths to obscure their arrival, lengths that no one will ever go again after this episode, and that is Wolfsbane to hide scent and wading through the river rather than walking down. Monroe even has to leave to avoid the pack instinct. These are mostly dropped concepts, but Monroe and Nick’s caution is appropriate for this point in their respective journeys. (Just because it might seem a bit contrived the way that I explained it, I should clarify. Monroe's involvement as it runs counter to the Postman is not a contrivance: Monroe is important to the story because Nick sought him out, thinking he was the other Blutbad. All else is the natural consequences of Nick profiling Monroe, and Monroe convincing him otherwise.)

 

Nick calls Hank in, and the sequence is mostly tension built from the Postman managing to seem normal, which makes Nick seem unreasonable. As I mentioned, much of this show seems focused on grounding us in Nick’s perspective. He has a very limited view of the world that increases over the course of the show, and there is a certain utility toward that end in drawing frustration from the lead being correct but unable to prove it. The Postman does give himself away eventually, and the cops kill the wolf, setting R H free.

 

The episode closes on Nick talking to Aunt Marie in the hospital as a cover of Sweet Dreams begins to play. A mysterious blonde girl preps a syringe for Marie, and it turns out to be Adalind, who sticks it into Nick instead after a struggle, knocking him out. Adalind joins Captain Renard in a car, revealing their connection and intentions. 1. They want Marie dead for some reason. 2. Sean Renard is the older man Adalind has fallen for (though that gets confirmed only later in the season).

 

Grimm Season One Thoughts and Conclusion

 

This is not exactly a traditional pilot that pitches you on a specific arc mystery based on a specific childhood trauma interspersed with a specific romantic goal. Nick’s parents’ deaths are important and do eventually feed into one of the season’s plot threads, the romantic connection with Juliette is an important component, and there are ongoing mysteries unfolding throughout season one with the keys and Renard, but the focus was on Nick entering this world and us along with him. The lore and worldbuilding of this series is rich, but it does not go for a title crawl info dump either. The season as a whole reads to me as “we’ll build up the friendship of Nick and Monroe and the rivalry of Adalind and Nick, and see how that weaves us into the finer details of how this world works.” I find that very unique and compelling as a format.

 

If any of this sounds interesting to you, I encourage you to watch the pilot. Obviously, I have a deep respect for the show, built in large part on where the show goes from here, to the point that I can gloss over or retroactively justify some of the elements that do not fit as cleanly as I would like, and I will own up to that. If/when I review episode two of this show, I will take some time to give an overview of the largest plot holes I can recall on the show and how those do impact some of the payoffs, but Grimm, as I see it, is this extraordinary show that takes a source material so ingrained in our culture that following it verbatim would come off as cliched but warps it into a unique take with fascinating storytelling decisions I have not seen elsewhere. It is also a show that gets better as it progresses. In my estimations, the show’s quality peaks during season five into season six. On our YouTube channel, we have read from Grimm’s Fairy Tales (so this is not entirely out of left field for us to cover), and you can watch that by following the link here: https://youtu.be/51qOdmtau6g?si=6HSS7ulZHsy4uaW9

 

 

OPINION: Van Helsing Has Outlived His Usefulness

 

By Joe Gibson

 

While I like the original book and enjoy most adaptations, there are some things that annoy me about how the franchise has developed over the years. Any given version seldom has all three of Lucy Westenra’s suitors (Arthur Holmwood, Quincey Morris and Dr. Jack Seward), and if it does (Coppola’s film), it has other drastic alterations that prevent it from being faithful to the text. Jonathan Harker is usually present, but he is either dumbed down or incidentally killed off, and the script is usually not smart enough to do so in such a way that doesn’t just also subtract from Mina Murray’s journey. Yet, there is one character that has only grown in focus and importance over the years. Where there is Dracula, there must always be Van Helsing for some reason.

 

Frankly, my problem is not with the character but with his oversaturation in the Dracula story. He is but one character in an ensemble yet leeches the focus away from all the rest to the point that in my cursory research in straight adaptations (excepting prequel, sequel or midquel scenarios like Dracula Untold, Son of Dracula or The Last Voyage of The Demeter), he never sits out whatever final fight occurs with Dracula even while Harker or even Mina die in acts one or two far more commonly. Think about how many times Jonathan Harker dies just to prop up Van Helsing, even while Van Helsing changes into a younger vampire-hunting leading man that Harker otherwise would be. It has been done well, and it has been done poorly, but it gets to a certain point where I wonder why it is done at all and begin to think of alternatives, alternatives that I find more engaging.

 

Let me pitch to you a scenario for a Dracula adaptation where it starts as the book does (so that's Jonathan Harker at Castle Dracula not Renfield, Lucy having three suitors propose back to back, the juxtaposition of Mina and Lucy's sexuality with Lucy getting bitten first, the arrival of Van Helsing, and return of Harker) but crucially, Harker with his capacity for self obfuscation and the suitors in general aren't taking it seriously so Van Helsing dies. It is then that they finally step up to defeat Dracula. As I started this article, Van Helsing overrides these other relationships, and maybe the simplest way to mitigate that problem is to eliminate him. It automatically raises the stakes to get rid of the sagelike mentor whose instruction surely would have prevailed.

 

The thing that I've realized recently is that the other members of this little fellowship altogether are capable of replacing Van Helsing if they align their strengths together. Technically, that shouldn't be surprising since depictions of Van Helsing have warped so as to replace every single one of them, but in this ensemble cast of iconic characters, it gives more of them more payoffs to follow the natural consequences of killing him off in the next adaptation.

 

If any of the characters in the original Dracula actually qualify as vampire slayers, it would be Jonathan Harker and Quincey Morris for being the ones to track down and kill Dracula. In terms of familiarity with vampires, Van Helsing's knowledge is only theoretical, but Harker's knowledge is personal due to his cold open section at the castle. A purist should acknowledge that Harker makes more sense as the vampire hunter on account of track record, but even so, Harker and Quincey are the ones in the party to kill Dracula in actuality, a role given to Van Helsing that they deserve to reclaim.

 

Seward is the doctor conducting his own investigation into Renfield, a case that blends science and supernatural (Van Helsing is also literally a mentor character to Seward, so the application of having to keep the former alive through following his example is a very minor change). Poising Van Helsing as the expendable mentor that Seward has to learn from is a simple change that keeps Seward relevant and memorable in the story. Van Helsing would no longer be around to treat Mina, which means that the scientific trial and error of how Seward studies Renfield and assists in treating Lucy at the beginning of the story would be more relevant for how he would treat Mina at the end of it. (Again without this throughline, it becomes easier to see why Seward is demoted in many adaptations, but I hope you can see how merely reducing Van Helsing increases Seward immensely.)

 

Arthur, interestingly, also has a concrete relationship with Van Helsing that lends itself so easily to a death for the old doctor. First, they are upper-class men (Van Helsing by reputation at least) and notably the most dignified. Arthur directly contrasts the other suitors with this category, since they are an awkward doctor and an American cowboy, while the positive reputation of foreigner Van Helsing directly contrasts the 1897-based xenophobia that exists toward Dracula. However, it also goes deeper than that. In the text, Arthur resembles an adult version of Van Helsing’s deceased son, creating a fatherly fondness for Arthur particularly in this group from Van Helsing. At the same time, one of Arthur’s most important moments in the novel is when his father dies so Arthur takes up the title of Lord Godalming. The motif of taking on the role of a father figure who dies already exists for Arthur, so it should be easy to see how Arthur could step up to be the leader of this fellowship following the death of another father figure. If this all sounds like a lot for a film, it really isn't especially since people already know the general story, but, if adapting these characters in a context that does them justice is too much for a film, then Dracula shouldn't be just films (not that the various miniseries take full advantage of all the members of the fellowship).

 

From the simple alteration of killing Van Helsing, Harker, Seward, Arthur, and Quincey Morris can all take on new life, and it really baffles me that I have not seen an adaptation do this yet (if one exists, please direct me to it). It would be so efficient within the existing framework of adapting the novel that I kind of think it should be obvious, but there is a reason off the top of my head for reticence to commit to something like this: Van Helsing is an exciting foil to Dracula.

 

 As I hope to have demonstrated, dialing back Van Helsing’s screentime in this way would only benefit the other characters, but the next challenge is that aforementioned rivalry. While it absolutely does raise the stakes to kill off the character who would have the easiest time defeating Dracula, the Dracula and Van Helsing rivalry has been iconic since at least the 1931 film (for all my talk of prioritizing other characters, I love a good “your will is strong, Van Helsing” moment). All that said, for one thing, it’s not technically in the book as strongly as it is in the 1931 film onward if at all, and I would also argue that there are several characters more suited for that archenemy role than Van Helsing.

 

As I already detailed, Harker and Quincey are the vampire slayers of this story. Harker is the obvious choice for archenemy, being the vehicle for our introduction to Dracula as well as the vehicle for the vampire’s death in the book, while also being Dracula’s persistent romantic rival. Despite this, many adaptations still diminish Harker’s role to favor Van Helsing, but the presence of Hutter in the Nosferatu films means that some form of Harker is one of the main universal constants of this story. Still, maybe Harker is too commonly killed off to justify setting him up as Dracula’s opposite; in that case, Quincey has so much potential.

 

Despite very few adaptations remembering Quincey, he has the most franchise potential as a vampire-slaying cowboy from yesteryear (if Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter can be a real movie, why not explore Quincey Morris fighting vampires in Texas?) or perhaps a modern cowboy cop as Rebecca Quincy (child of Morris Quincy) is in Renfield 2023. Another idea off the top of my head would circumvent the immortality problem of Dracula, where, in any given continuity, Dracula gets killed by methods that should work but then returns to life for the next movie. Since the deaths of Dracula and Quincey are so intertwined in the original novel, why wouldn’t whatever revives Dracula also revive Quincey? In the event of that story, Dracula and Quincey are on a level playing field while avoiding the “power creep” that occurs from the modern conception of Van Helsing being an accomplished vampire hunter that still somehow struggles against a vampire. 

 

(Power creep is essentially when the skills and weaponry necessary early on in the story become superfluous later on because of increasing improvement and innovation, and  having a character that specializes in taking down vampires struggling for a whole film to take down a vampire can very easily make all or much of the story redundant and unnecessary. It does not necessarily have to play out that way, but there is no arms race necessary in the battle between vampire and normal laypeople as this story is in the book or the faithful adaptations.)

 

Just because the release of Nosferatu 2024 has reminded me of it, The Last Voyage of the Demeter features a character, Black doctor Clemens, who gradually comes to put together what is happening on the ship and organizes the most tenable resistance to the Count he can. Clemens is implicitly the closest thing to the Van Helsing in that film’s continuity, and the film is so much more interesting for making a new character that we slowly learn about while he grows more dynamic in the fight to stay alive (he does not seek out the vampire but does seek out the ship and helps the victims on board for reasons we learn over the runtime). However, I do not want to spoil too much of that film and character since its low box office (like Renfield 2023) and lack of significant success on streaming (unlike Renfield 2023) means that most of you reading have not seen it, so let us proceed to the most tenable option.

 

As the Nosferatu films demonstrate, the most substantive stakes and therefore most cogent dichotomy often are found in the battle between Mina/Ellen and Dracula/Orlok. Outside of Renfield, Mina is the clearest demonstration of what Dracula’s will can do to a person, with the strength in Mina’s character coming from how she resists the changes (this is more present in the book than the 1931 film), and Ellen is the one that manages to kill Nosferatu. One aspect I very much like about the Mina Dracula rivalry in its various forms is that Mina is both the best equipped (an entire fellowship of men fighting for her as well as a connection to Dracula she can sometimes exploit) and worst equipped (often a physically weak sexually repressed woman slowly falling victim to his curse) person to defeat him, and that is where the best drama comes from (a fight that can go either way based on the characters' strengths and weaknesses is more compelling than a fight with a foregone conclusion). The advantage to selecting Mina as the counterbalance to Dracula in a story is that she is relevant throughout the whole story, whereas Van Helsing usually has to be summoned to help.

 

Though I have argued Van Helsing’s true modern utility is in passing on the torch, I should say that I do very much appreciate his functionality in the original book as well as the Edward Van Sloan and Peter Cushing versions of the character. It is just also true that each of those and the following great adaptations of the character leeched away focus and importance from the remainder of the cast in ways that either are now or someday may prove detrimental to the Dracula IP.