Bela Lugosi in the classic 1931 version of 'Dracula.' PHOTOS BY THE ASSOCIATED PRESS View More Images from this story Visit the Photo Place

Weekender:Sounds

Teens debate sides between classic and modern vampires

Date published: 10/30/2009

Get your cape out, put your fangs on--Halloween time is here again, and vampires are the hottest thing.

The vampire image has been made over and interest in vampires rekindled through recent stories like the "Twilight" saga.

But which is better--the new, brooding vampires or the old-fashioned bat-like ones? Our teen writers offer two different takes this week.

BY EMILY CHURCHILL Think about the word "vampire." What does it remind you of? Nosferatu, the creepy, crawly, old bloodsucker hidden high up in a castle? Or Edward Cullen, the suave, sparkly superman of Forks, Wash.? For most of today's teens, the latter is what they automatically turn to. In recent years, the traditional connotation of a vampire has been stripped away and replaced with a new, dark and sensual creature, infinitely more exciting and entrancing than its predecessor. The switch from frighteningly elderly men to young and intelligent breath-takers, may have occurred around the time that the movie "Interview With the Vampire" came out. The world suddenly saw vampires in a new light, and they wanted more. After the "Harry Potter" craze of yesteryear, publishers found that what the world craved were young, angst-ridden protagonists that the average teen could relate to on some level. Hollywood obliged, and we now have the screaming fans packing the theater to catch a glimpse of vampire siblings Edward and Alice onscreen in "Twilight" or flocking around television to see shows like HBO's "True Blood." This kind of reaction can mean only one thing: Vampire authors and filmmakers of today are doing something right. In the case of vampires, authors have made their inherent sexuality rise to a new level. Instead of an old, slimy man luring women closer with words and money, these new creatures possess a special kind of charisma, eye-opening beauty and a desperate kind of romantic tragedy. And, of course, the creators play up the immortality idea, since many teenagers love to think that they're invincible. This new idea of a handsome, devilish being who is actually a "good guy" is so much more interesting than a traditional bat monster. In all honesty, would you rather watch a bat flap around and drink blood, or a smoldering man fighting off his desires? What makes these new vampires, like Edward, unique is that they are not only vampires, but teenagers as well, dealing with the same angst as their peers; this seems to be keeping viewers coming back for more. Dracula's large and outdated cape has fallen away, and it's certainly about time. Emily Churchill is a junior at Stafford High School. BY ALEX JOHNSON With all the hype over the next "Twilight" movie and numerous teen vampire dramas making their debut, one can't help but get the feeling that something is wrong. Vampires are bloodsucking, demonic creatures of death, right? They are supposed to be frightening! So why are there so many shows and books portraying them as whiny, angst-ridden teenagers? It seems that many have lost sight of what vampires are supposed to be. The giggling teenage girls, the watering down of the vampires--it's a crime, an outrage! The once powerful and bloodthirsty vampires have now been reduced to props in sappy love stories. Making vampires more normal and weaker in nature takes away much of their appeal. Let's be honest with ourselves. What's scarier: a towering man from Eastern Europe with a hunger for blood, or an emo-faced punk with fangs? Before "Twilight," before "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," before all the metrosexual vampires of today, there was Bela Lugosi as Dracula. Dracula was scary, no way of getting around it. He lived in a creepy castle, preyed on beautiful young women, drove men to madness and murdered people to satisfy his insatiable lust for blood. In fact, the real Count Dracula, a Romanian warlord, was called Vlad the Impaler because of his tendency to impale his enemies on wooden spikes and let their corpses rot on the castle lawn. It's quite a stretch of the imagination to see someone like Edward Cullen of "Twilight" impaling people on wooden stakes--not that it wouldn't be cool to see him do that to some of the other characters. To some, mainly the "Twilight" fans, this might seem disgusting, but that's what Halloween is about: to scare and be scared, to freak and be freaked. How about, instead of another teen vampire movie, a remake of "Nosferatu"? Forget the pansy vampires--let's see something that sends chills down the spine and makes us afraid to turn off the light, because, frankly, the image of a vegetarian vampire is just rotten. Alex Johnson is a homeschooled senior.

Follow us on

Date published: 10/30/2009