Dracula

CharmedSlayer85

Potential
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
402
My question about Dracula is what makes Dracula not a super vampire in the Buffy world, I mean as far as I know in the Seven Seasons Buffy has been on television, Dracula is the ONLY vampire that has been staked on the show TWICE and is still alive? I mean what vampire has ever done that? I mean sure Darla was staked and came back but that was through dark magicks and such, Dracula came back from his own accord, also he doesn't have the vamp face so I'd say he's harder to track if you don't know what he looks like neither do his three sisters. And I'm just wondering what makes them different that they don't have vamp face, compared to every other vampire on the planet.
 
It's just the typical persona of Dracula, I think they wanted to keep up the whole image of him. It wasn't correct in Buffy terms but in popular culture it was and I think it would've been weird if they had went away from that.
 
R
Randy Giles
[No message]
nerd4hire
nerd4hire
[No message]
Ive heard from people that he dose have the "bumpy face" but uses Gypsie magick to hide it.
 
If I remember correctly, and it's been many, many years since I read Mr Stoker's novel, it was hinted that Dracula had made a bargain with some dark power in order to achieve revenge on his enemies. That might mean that he wasn't a real vampire at all, but instead some being who shared the powers of the undead along with a few enhancements, such as being able to morph into different animal shapes and stuff like that. I definitely remember that Van Helsing killed him by driving a wooden stake through his heart, then decapitating him, filling his mouth with garlic, and burying the head at the corpse's feet. The wooden stake, incidentally, wasn't to kill him as much as to pin him to the ground while the other things were being done.
 
"Buffy vs Dracula" sort of sucked. Mostly because of Dracula. The actor they chose? Terrible. He also didn't make sense in the Buffyverse.

But speaking of him not having a bumpy face...am I the only fan who thinks the vampires in the Buffyverse suck? I mean, I love Buffy and Angel, but I think the vampires are one of the most horrible fictional versions of vampires ever, aside from all the movies that they vampirism is a scientific disease.
 
C
crabby patty
the actor was terrible, how did they pick him???
he wasn't a real vampire at all, but instead some being who shared the powers of the undead along with a few enhancements, such as being able to morph into different animal shapes and stuff like that.

If Dracula were indeed a vampire, he had to have been made one by another vampire.
So the theory of him not being a true vampire would make sense since anybody that makes "the most famous vampire" had to have been rather potent as well.
 
The actor they chose? Terrible.

wasn't SMG's hubby. Freddie Prinz Jr. supposed to play Dracula, but he had to pull out at the last minute or something?
 
R
Randy Giles
He would've made an interesting Dracula, not sure if he would've been great though. BTW before I meant "lol" not "kik" haha
Freddie/Dracula?

wasn't SMG's hubby. Freddie Prinz Jr. supposed to play Dracula, but he had to pull out at the last minute or something?

Freddie Prinz would've been the worst Dracula in the history of movie/tv history! Dracula was a unique being, a one of a kind monster who embodied elegance and charm while projecting an aura of sheer ageless evil so pure as to be absolutely irresistible. He's nowhere near the actor to pull such a role off. Even Leslie Nielson and George Hamilton, in their comic portrayals of the Count did a better job. Freddie might possibly edge Xander out for the butt monkey role, but the most sinister yet charming monster in all of literature? The Cable Guy could do a better job.
 
nerd4hire
nerd4hire
Too true.
wasn't SMG's hubby. Freddie Prinz Jr. supposed to play Dracula, but he had to pull out at the last minute or something?

ha that would've been an interesting twist. Plus a little romanticism between the lovely couple...:hearton:
 
He doesnt look like a "Dracula" type to me. And the guy who played Dracula in this episode, I agree, kinda sucked as well. I wonder if you get made into a vampire by dracula, you look like him, or you look like all the other vampires with the head bumpyness.
 
I started watching season 5 with a friend of mine who hadn't watched Buffy before, and she fell crazy in love with Dracula. (That's when I realised she's never be a real Buffy fan.)
This is one of my least favourite episodes and I think Dracula as a character feels like such a joke.. uh uh, not good..
 
M
mogwaid
karma coz you making me say mhm..
It's just the typical persona of Dracula, I think they wanted to keep up the whole image of him. It wasn't correct in Buffy terms but in popular culture it was and I think it would've been weird if they had went away from that.

That's fine, but that was never what Buffy did. It took classic monsters and put it's own spin on them - for example, I always felt that the Master was the show's answer to supreme vamps like Dracula.

At the very least, they should've made him correct in terms of the established mythology.
 
palabravampiress
palabravampiress
I think I agree. I always thought of The Master as sort of a Dracula figure.
I think the reason he wasn't killed was because he wasn't made up by the writers, and like he'll be in other things, and if he was killed on there, it would just be sort of stupid.
 
While I agree that Dracula made NO sense in this episode, I actually thought the episode overall was very funny. I loved the fact that he's basically a rock star in the Slayer world, and that they're all fanboying out over him. Also: poor Xander. 🙂
 
palabravampiress
palabravampiress
Yes! The ep was too funny! And don't forget Giles' time with the sisters.
"Buffy vs Dracula" sort of sucked. Mostly because of Dracula. The actor they chose? Terrible. He also didn't make sense in the Buffyverse.

But speaking of him not having a bumpy face...am I the only fan who thinks the vampires in the Buffyverse suck? I mean, I love Buffy and Angel, but I think the vampires are one of the most horrible fictional versions of vampires ever, aside from all the movies that they vampirism is a scientific disease.

I really liked Joss' interpretation of the vampire mythlogy the whole vampires turning into dust and vampires having the vamp face. Also I enjoy that all vampires aren't shape shifters, can levitate and fly (kind of like the Buffy movie) and read minds and all that extra crap.
 
I really liked Joss' interpretation of the vampire mythlogy the whole vampires turning into dust and vampires having the vamp face. Also I enjoy that all vampires aren't shape shifters, can levitate and fly (kind of like the Buffy movie) and read minds and all that extra crap.

I agree, his interpretation of vamps is perfect in the fact that he avoids the cheesiness of the stereotypical vampire. :: vampire
 
On the one hand, the concept of the episode--that the famous Dracula exists not only in his own mythology but also in the Buffyverse--is a little hard to take seriously. On the other hand, it was done pretty well.

Basically, there are many different interpretations of the vampire, and of course Buffy has only encountered her own version: the Joss Whedon interpretation. Buffy vs. Dracula is trying to throw a surprise at Buffy by having her encounter one of those other versions: a creature that is called a vampire, but follows different rules than those that normally determine what vampires are like.

This different set of rules is why Buffy just has to give up and go away when her normal wooden stake doesn't do the trick. And it could also be the reason why Buffy was so vulnerable to Dracula's hypnosis at first, but then all of a sudden snapped out of it and became totally immune. Her Slayer immunities weren't able to handle Dracula at first, but once her system got the hang of it, it was completely effective at resisting this compulsion, this alien influence from another mythology.
 
Did they say whether or not Dracula was the first human vampire or not? That would possibly explain his unique abilities, or...maybe he is technically (well of course he is) a vampire, but is different from the other vampires in that he made a deal with Satan (or some other demonic entity in the Buffyverse) to get those abilities...so rather than having his soul move on and his body simply be a vessel for the vampire demon, it's actually him as well.

It would also be interesting if there were various breeds of vampires in the Buffyverse, and have Dracula be part of a rare breed or something. But that's just me.

I'm watching season five again right now, starting with this episode, and I still think the actor playing Dracula is horrendous and doesn't portray the character well at all. Also, I don't really like how he was written. Other than that, the episode is pretty funny.

But does anyone else wonder how the hell this became a season opener? It's complete filler! This is middle-of-the-season type stuff, not we're-starting-a-brand-new-year. And the *feel* of the episode is all wrong, it doesn't even feel like the same show to me. I don't know why.
 
Did they say whether or not Dracula was the first human vampire or not? That would possibly explain his unique abilities, or...maybe he is technically (well of course he is) a vampire, but is different from the other vampires in that he made a deal with Satan (or some other demonic entity in the Buffyverse) to get those abilities...so rather than having his soul move on and his body simply be a vessel for the vampire demon, it's actually him as well.

It would also be interesting if there were various breeds of vampires in the Buffyverse, and have Dracula be part of a rare breed or something. But that's just me.

I'm watching season five again right now, starting with this episode, and I still think the actor playing Dracula is horrendous and doesn't portray the character well at all. Also, I don't really like how he was written. Other than that, the episode is pretty funny.

But does anyone else wonder how the hell this became a season opener? It's complete filler! This is middle-of-the-season type stuff, not we're-starting-a-brand-new-year. And the *feel* of the episode is all wrong, it doesn't even feel like the same show to me. I don't know why.

He only knew how to do that stuff because he knew Gypsy magick. There wasn't a pact with the anothing evil. And we know from season 7 that there are different breeds of Vampire!
 
Back
Top Bottom