So is Vlad a vampire movie that’s not about vampires? Is this not a vampire movie at all? Or is he a self-hating vampire? Entertainment Weekly sat down with Vlad screenwriter Charlie Hunnam and talked about his inspiration for the film – travels through Romania while filming Cold Mountain – and the plot’s relationship to actual historical events. At the end of the interview he says:
As the script stands now, we don’t touch on vampirism. That was my one non-negotiable area when we were developing it, and thankfully, nobody suggested that we should delve into it at the end. But you can clearly see the things that Bram Stoker took…. Vlad was such a brutal man, and the trick is to make him sympathetic. That was the challenge, and if we’ve succeeded in any way in this script, I truly believe that it’s genuinely making him sympathetic.
Earlier this week the film was reported in a way that made Vlad sound like a vampire film. But as Hunnam points out, “There are a million ways to show that this guy is the origin of vampirism without actually having him drinking blood.” Does that mean Vlad serves as an allegory for vampirism? Is it supposed to be the start of the legend? Is the audience supposed to know this? Unfortunately, the interview doesn’t clear everything up.
Hunnam also talks about the Braveheart vibe, rather than the 300 vibe, that the film is supposed to evoke and the actors that Hunnam hopes will star in his film. Read the entire interview for the rest.