Connect with us

Editorials

The Fly-Eating Henchman: A Brief History of the ‘Renfield’ Character on the Big Screen

Published

on

Renfield character
Pictured: 'Dracula' (1931)

With the exception of the Count himself, Renfield is the most dynamic character in the Dracula story. Originally conceived as a madman in Dr. Seward’s sanitarium with a mysterious connection to his vampire overlord, Renfield has evolved with the ever-extending mythos that has arisen around Stoker’s original creation.

Since the earliest Dracula films, the character has changed and deepened, become more and less integral to the story depending on the focus of the filmmakers, but has always been an opportunity for great character actors to let loose and give some of the most memorable performances in horror cinema.

This week, Renfield will finally get his moment at center stage, with Nicholas Hoult becoming the latest actor to bite into the role. In anticipation of his starring turn, here is a look at some of the very best depictions of everyone’s favorite fly-eating maniac.


Nosferatu (1922)

To avoid copyright entanglements with the Bram Stoker estate, the filmmakers of Nosferatu changed the names of the characters from Dracula to disguise that it was an adaptation of the novel. Here, Renfield is Knock (Alexander Granach) and serves as an Expressionist archetype—the insane mastermind that unleashes evil upon the world of the film, much like Dr. Caligari in The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) or Rotwang in Metropolis (1927). Knock is an estate agent with wild, unkempt hair surrounding the dome of his bald head, rotting teeth, and a sinister disposition. He is first seen with his feet wrapped around the stool he is sitting on, reading a piece of paper filled with occult symbols. He then sends Hutter (the film’s stand-in for Jonathan Harker played by Gustav von Wangenheim) to arrange for Count Orlok (Max Schreck) to purchase a home in the city of Wisborg.

The tradition of making the Renfield character a real estate agent, often as Harker’s boss or colleague, is a tradition that would continue through many films all the way up to Bram Stoker’s Dracula seventy years after Nosferatu, but it is an invention of this film. The closer Orlok gets to Wisborg, the more Knock falls under his spell and is soon committed to an insane asylum. The film cuts between him snatching at flies and Professor Bulwer (the Van Helsing character) teaching about carnivorous plants, which are compared to vampires. Knock also gets an exciting chase sequence in which he is hunted down through the streets and surrounding countryside by frightened townspeople who blame him for the epidemic of plague that has seized Wisborg. As was often the case in the German Expressionist tradition of archetypes, Granach’s performance is broad but compelling. In his few minutes of screen time, he sets much of the template for Renfield performances to come, but the next interpretation of the role would prove iconic.


Dracula (1931)

The greatest portrayal of Renfield still belongs to Dwight Frye in Universal’s Dracula starring Bela Lugosi as the Count. To streamline the story, it is Renfield rather than Jonathan Harker that meets Dracula in Transylvania, where he is bitten and made the vampire’s minion, explaining his bloodlust.

Frye beautifully plays the skeptic in these early scenes and holds his own against Lugosi’s undeniable magnetism. From the moment Renfield is discovered in the wreck of the Demeter, he steals every scene in which he appears. The distinctive squeezed laughter Frye created for the role is bizarre, creepy, and above all unforgettable. His greatest moment comes with his delivery of the “rats, rats, rats…” speech late in the film, his emphasis on the sibilant elements of each word making him sound like a hissing snake and sending chills up the viewer’s spine. He is frightening, magnetic, repellant, and pathetic all at once. Be it the nervous laughter, the wild eyes, or the vermin-like vocal affectations, practically every Renfield performance to come owes some debt, even a very small one in some cases, to Dwight Frye whose monumental performance in the role will likely never be eclipsed.


Count Dracula (1970)

Strangely, Renfield would not appear in another major Dracula movie for nearly forty years. Because he dies in the 1931 film, it makes sense that he does not appear in any of the Universal sequels, but it is odd that he is not a character in any of the Hammer series at all. Jesús (Jess) Franco’s Count Dracula (El Conde Dracula) would be the first attempt to faithfully adapt Bram Stoker’s novel. It does not entirely succeed in that ambition, but it does offer an opportunity for Christopher Lee to play the Count as he had always wanted, relying heavily on Stoker’s descriptions and dialogue at least for its depiction of Dracula, and a dream casting choice for the role of Renfield—Klaus Kinski.

Unfortunately, Kinski isn’t given much to do, and delivers a subdued, practically silent performance. His screams and cries are heard offscreen, but we never actually see his ravings. What is seen in the final film gives the impression that Kinski was uncooperative during filming, which was not unusual for the volatile actor, and his role was greatly altered as a result. Whether or not this was actually the case is unknown, but ultimately, he gives an underwhelming performance in a lackluster film, which feels like a wasted opportunity for such a dynamic actor as Kinski. Fortunately, he would return at the end of the decade in a much better Dracula film.


Nosferatu, Dracula, and Love at First Bite (1979)

‘Love at First Bite’

1979 was an embarrassment of riches for Dracula fans with three memorable and very different adaptations. Werner Herzog’s Nosferatu: The Vampyre (aka Nosferatu: Phantom Der Nacht) saw Klaus Kinski’s return to the Dracula story, this time as the Count himself, but much more in the mold of Max Schreck, though infused with much more humanity and melancholy, than Bela Lugosi or Christopher Lee. In this film, Renfield is very much like Knock in the 1922 version and sends Jonathan Harker (Bruno Ganz) to Transylvania to make arrangements for Dracula to come to Germany. Roland Topor’s unnerving performance, punctuated by fits of high-pitched nervous laughter, makes this one of the most memorable versions of Renfield ever. His wood and mesh cage filled with hundreds of flies is an especially delicious touch, as is the comment that he is the patient who “bit a cow.” To me, Topor’s is one of the three greatest Renfield performances to date along with Dwight Frye and Tom Waits, while also being one of the most overlooked.

The two other Renfield performances of 1979 are quite different from most. Milo Renfield is not given much screen time in John Badham’s Dracula, but actor Tony Haygarth makes the most of every moment. In this iteration, Renfield has been cheated and betrayed his entire life, and Dracula is merely the latest to swindle this pathetic man. After being attacked by the vampire while delivering a box of earth to Carfax Abbey, he feeds on cockroaches to quench his thirst for blood. Arte Johnson’s Renfield in the comedy Love at First Bite opposite George Hamilton as Dracula, is something of a cross between Dwight Frye’s version (the laugh in particular is quite familiar) and Marty Feldman’s Igor in Young Frankenstein with a dash of Peter Lorre mixed in for good measure. Unique to this film is the rapport and banter that master and familiar share. Sure, Renfield does Dracula’s bidding, but he very much enjoys doing the dirty work.


Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992)

Renfield character dracula

The last great version of Renfield, at least in a major motion picture, is Tom Waits’ portrayal in Bram Stoker’s Dracula directed by Francis Ford Coppola. Like most Dracula films, his version also creates a reason for Renfield’s madness and connection to Dracula (Gary Oldman) not found in Stoker’s novel. In this film, he was a real estate broker in the same firm as Jonathan Harker and preceded him in his dealings with the Transylvanian Count. When he returns to England, Renfield has a “complete mental break” in the words of Dr. Seward (Richard E. Grant). He is fiercely loyal to Dracula, but also warns Mina of the danger she is in. All the while, he is jealous of Dracula’s devotion to her, which Renfield believes is owed to him. “Master, you promised me eternal life, but you give it to the pretty woman,” he cries into the void after a visit from Mina. As with Dwight Frye and Roland Topor before him, there is a great deal of humor and subversive glee injected into Waits’ performance. He plays Renfield like an addict going through withdrawal, with a seething energy underlying every action and emotions that turn on a dime. It remains one of the most dynamic portrayals of the character ever committed to film.


After 1992, Dracula stories attempted to modernize, as with Dracula 2000 (2000), Stephen Somers’ Van Helsing (2004), and The Invitation (2022), and strayed further and further from the original characters. In these, Renfield is nowhere to be found. He did play a major part in the 2020 Netflix series Dracula with Claes Bang as the vampire and Mark Gatiss as Renfield, but otherwise, the character has essentially lay dormant for thirty years.

I expect that Nicholas Hoult’s Renfield and Nicolas Cage’s Dracula will be welcome additions to the over one-hundred-year tradition of the Count and his loyal familiar on screen. As the tagline indicates, maybe it “sucks to be him,” but it will surely be a joy for Dracula fans to finally see Renfield take his long-overdue moment in the spotlight.

Renfield arrives in theaters on Friday, April 14.

Renfield character movie

Editorials

What’s Wrong with My Baby!? Larry Cohen’s ‘It’s Alive’ at 50

Published

on

Netflix It's Alive

Soon after the New Hollywood generation took over the entertainment industry, they started having children. And more than any filmmakers that came before—they were terrified. Rosemary’s Baby (1968), The Exorcist (1973), The Omen (1976), Eraserhead (1977), The Brood (1979), The Shining (1980), Possession (1981), and many others all deal, at least in part, with the fears of becoming or being a parent. What if my child turns out to be a monster? is corrupted by some evil force? or turns out to be the fucking Antichrist? What if I screw them up somehow, or can’t help them, or even go insane and try to kill them? Horror has always been at its best when exploring relatable fears through extreme circumstances. A prime example of this is Larry Cohen’s 1974 monster-baby movie It’s Alive, which explores the not only the rollercoaster of emotions that any parent experiences when confronted with the difficulties of raising a child, but long-standing questions of who or what is at fault when something goes horribly wrong.

Cohen begins making his underlying points early in the film as Frank Davis (John P. Ryan) discusses the state of the world with a group of expectant fathers in a hospital waiting room. They discuss the “overabundance of lead” in foods and the environment, smog, and pesticides that only serve to produce roaches that are “bigger, stronger, and harder to kill.” Frank comments that this is “quite a world to bring a kid into.” This has long been a discussion point among people when trying to decide whether to have kids or not. I’ve had many conversations with friends who have said they feel it’s irresponsible to bring children into such a violent, broken, and dangerous world, and I certainly don’t begrudge them this. My wife and I did decide to have children but that doesn’t mean that it’s been easy.

Immediately following this scene comes It’s Alive’s most famous sequence in which Frank’s wife Lenore (Sharon Farrell) is the only person left alive in her delivery room, the doctors clawed and bitten to death by her mutant baby, which has escaped. “What does my baby look like!? What’s wrong with my baby!?” she screams as nurses wheel her frantically into a recovery room. The evening that had begun with such joy and excitement at the birth of their second child turned into a nightmare. This is tough for me to write, but on some level, I can relate to this whiplash of emotion. When my second child was born, they came about five weeks early. I’ll use the pronouns “they/them” for privacy reasons when referring to my kids. Our oldest was still very young and went to stay with my parents and we sped off to the hospital where my wife was taken into an operating room for an emergency c-section. I was able to carry our newborn into the NICU (natal intensive care unit) where I was assured that this was routine for all premature births. The nurses assured me there was nothing to worry about and the baby looked big and healthy. I headed to where my wife was taken to recover to grab a few winks assuming that everything was fine. Well, when I awoke, I headed back over to the NICU to find that my child was not where I left them. The nurse found me and told me that the baby’s lungs were underdeveloped, and they had to put them in a special room connected to oxygen tubes and wires to monitor their vitals.

It’s difficult to express the fear that overwhelmed me in those moments. Everything turned out okay, but it took a while and I’m convinced to this day that their anxiety struggles spring from these first weeks of life. As our children grew, we learned that two of the three were on the spectrum and that anxiety, depression, ADHD, and OCD were also playing a part in their lives. Parents, at least speaking for myself, can’t help but blame themselves for the struggles their children face. The “if only” questions creep in and easily overcome the voices that assure us that it really has nothing to do with us. In the film, Lenore says, “maybe it’s all the pills I’ve been taking that brought this on.” Frank muses aloud about how he used to think that Frankenstein was the monster, but when he got older realized he was the one that made the monster. The aptly named Frank is wondering if his baby’s mutation is his fault, if he created the monster that is terrorizing Los Angeles. I have made plenty of “if only” statements about myself over the years. “If only I hadn’t had to work so much, if only I had been around more when they were little.” Mothers may ask themselves, “did I have a drink, too much coffee, or a cigarette before I knew I was pregnant? Was I too stressed out during the pregnancy?” In other words, most parents can’t help but wonder if it’s all their fault.

At one point in the film, Frank goes to the elementary school where his baby has been sighted and is escorted through the halls by police. He overhears someone comment about “screwed up genes,” which brings about age-old questions of nature vs. nurture. Despite the voices around him from doctors and detectives that say, “we know this isn’t your fault,” Frank can’t help but think it is, and that the people who try to tell him it isn’t really think it’s his fault too. There is no doubt that there is a hereditary element to the kinds of mental illness struggles that my children and I deal with. But, and it’s a bit but, good parenting goes a long way in helping children deal with these struggles. Kids need to know they’re not alone, a good parent can provide that, perhaps especially parents that can relate to the same kinds of struggles. The question of nature vs. nurture will likely never be entirely answered but I think there’s more than a good chance that “both/and” is the case. Around the midpoint of the film, Frank agrees to disown the child and sign it over for medical experimentation if caught or killed. Lenore and the older son Chris (Daniel Holzman) seek to nurture and teach the baby, feeling that it is not a monster, but a member of the family.

It’s Alive takes these ideas to an even greater degree in the fact that the Davis Baby really is a monster, a mutant with claws and fangs that murders and eats people. The late ’60s and early ’70s also saw the rise in mass murderers and serial killers which heightened the nature vs. nurture debate. Obviously, these people were not literal monsters but human beings that came from human parents, but something had gone horribly wrong. Often the upbringing of these killers clearly led in part to their antisocial behavior, but this isn’t always the case. It’s Alive asks “what if a ‘monster’ comes from a good home?” In this case is it society, environmental factors, or is it the lead, smog, and pesticides? It is almost impossible to know, but the ending of the film underscores an uncomfortable truth—even monsters have parents.

As the film enters its third act, Frank joins the hunt for his child through the Los Angeles sewers and into the L.A. River. He is armed with a rifle and ready to kill on sight, having divorced himself from any relationship to the child. Then Frank finds his baby crying in the sewers and his fatherly instincts take over. With tears in his eyes, he speaks words of comfort and wraps his son in his coat. He holds him close, pats and rocks him, and whispers that everything is going to be okay. People often wonder how the parents of those who perform heinous acts can sit in court, shed tears, and defend them. I think it’s a complex issue. I’m sure that these parents know that their child has done something evil, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are still their baby. Your child is a piece of yourself formed into a whole new human being. Disowning them would be like cutting off a limb, no matter what they may have done. It doesn’t erase an evil act, far from it, but I can understand the pain of a parent in that situation. I think It’s Alive does an exceptional job placing its audience in that situation.

Despite the serious issues and ideas being examined in the film, It’s Alive is far from a dour affair. At heart, it is still a monster movie and filled with a sense of fun and a great deal of pitch-black humor. In one of its more memorable moments, a milkman is sucked into the rear compartment of his truck as red blood mingles with the white milk from smashed bottles leaking out the back of the truck and streaming down the street. Just after Frank agrees to join the hunt for his baby, the film cuts to the back of an ice cream truck with the words “STOP CHILDREN” emblazoned on it. It’s a movie filled with great kills, a mutant baby—created by make-up effects master Rick Baker early in his career, and plenty of action—and all in a PG rated movie! I’m telling you, the ’70s were wild. It just also happens to have some thoughtful ideas behind it as well.

Which was Larry Cohen’s specialty. Cohen made all kinds of movies, but his most enduring have been his horror films and all of them tackle the social issues and fears of the time they were made. God Told Me To (1976), Q: The Winged Serpent (1982), and The Stuff (1985) are all great examples of his socially aware, low-budget, exploitation filmmaking with a brain and It’s Alive certainly fits right in with that group. Cohen would go on to write and direct two sequels, It Lives Again (aka It’s Alive 2) in 1978 and It’s Alive III: Island of the Alive in 1987 and is credited as a co-writer on the 2008 remake. All these films explore the ideas of parental responsibility in light of the various concerns of the times they were made including abortion rights and AIDS.

Fifty years after It’s Alive was initially released, it has only become more relevant in the ensuing years. Fears surrounding parenthood have been with us since the beginning of time but as the years pass the reasons for these fears only seem to become more and more profound. In today’s world the conversation of the fathers in the waiting room could be expanded to hormones and genetic modifications in food, terrorism, climate change, school and other mass shootings, and other threats that were unknown or at least less of a concern fifty years ago. Perhaps the fearmongering conspiracy theories about chemtrails and vaccines would be mentioned as well, though in a more satirical fashion, as fears some expectant parents encounter while endlessly doomscrolling Facebook or Twitter. Speaking for myself, despite the struggles, the fears, and the sadness that sometimes comes with having children, it’s been worth it. The joys ultimately outweigh all of that, but I understand the terror too. Becoming a parent is no easy choice, nor should it be. But as I look back, I can say that I’m glad we made the choice we did.

I wonder if Frank and Lenore can say the same thing.

Continue Reading