When a sound version of Dracula finally made it to celluloid, the first such movie to feature a real (as opposed to pretend) vampire, a choice faced the filmmakers. How to portray the vampire? Taking their cue from the Balderston-Dean play, they decided the title character would ooze sinister charm—an archetype that owes far more to Polidori’s much-earlier work The Vampire than to Bram Stoker’s novel. Actors considered for the lead included Lon Chaney (ironically enough, the great silent star died of throat cancer first) Conrad Veidt and Frederick March, but in the end the role went to tall, thin and suave Bela Lugosi.
Flash forward seven decades or so. Another major studio prepares to adapt another vampire novel to the screen. Herein the choice is more subtle. The male lead in Stephanie Meyers’ Twilight is written as handsome, gallant (if moody) and highly ethical.
A more pressing question is that of casting. Who shall play Edward? Fan favorites included Orlando Bloom, Tom Wellin and Hayden Christensen. But in the end the role went to Robert Pattinson—up until then best known for portraying the doomed nice guy Cedric Diggory in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Initially (and this is sometimes hard to credit now) fans reacted badly to the news. They soon changed their minds for the most part, especially once the teasers and trailers began showing. One might even call this evidence that sometimes professional casting directors and filmmakers actually do know more about how to do their jobs than the average moviegoer (although there remains a die-hard group of fans who still reject Pattinson in the role).
What Meyers herself said about the casting which bears repeating: “There are very few actors who can look both dangerous and beautiful at the same time…” Herein perhaps lies the core of what connects the years-ago casting of Bela Lugosi and the more recent decision to go with Robert Pattinson. More, it highlights something that goes into the casing of most vampire parts, at least the ones where the vampire is a major character.
Consider Nosferatu. F.W.Murnau’s unauthorized adaptation of Dracula saw the vampire as a snaggle-toothed horror whose bug-eyes promised disease and nightmare. Yet then look at the major motion pictures and later television series in which vampires were leads. More, look at the ones that proved most popular, made the greatest connection with the largest number of fans.
Read the rest at VampireFilmFestival.com
Posts
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
5 comments:
I love most vampire stories but SM's books made vampires mainstream acceptable but still dangerous. I love the fact that Pattinson was cast as Edward, he was actually my first choice when I heard that Twilight was to be made!!!!
Rob I think has the ability to become an iconic actor if he chooses to stay with acting.
I was never into vampires until I stumbled into Twilight...Wasn't in the target demographics initially. But kudos for Catherine for casting Rob when it could have been so tempting to cast a more popular lead.
Robert could look cruel if he wanted to, I can't wait for him to play a full-on bad guy.
He has a face and a beauty that work as innocent and cruel, depending on how he used it, so I agree with the guy's point.
Another thing about his face and not pointed to here is the fact his face is ethereral and timeless. He can channel James Dean or some brooding Romantic poet from a couple centuries back with little effort.
Good read! And it really was Rob who upped the 'danger' factor by fighting for Edward to be more brooding and dark than originally scripted. The "I want to kiss you/kill you" diachotomy is something he fully understood.
SM has it perfectly: “There are very few actors who can look both dangerous and beautiful at the same time…”
What is the appeal with things that are bad for you being so beautiful..
Post a Comment