Topic: Uh, Dracula? I thought that story was made up, actually...

[Nagumo]

Does anybody else think it's weird that Soma was completely ignorant of Dracula being a real person when asked during Aria? You could argue that the Belmonts always managed to stop Dracula before he could become a known presence to common folk, but I also remembered a quote from the manual of Chronicles that turned him into a pretty competent villain who almost managed to conquer the world during Christopher's time. You would think some people would have remembered that.       

     

[Donoffrio]

Does anybody else think it's weird that Soma was completely ignorant of Dracula being a real person when asked during Aria? You could argue that the Belmonts always managed to stop Dracula before he could become a known presence to common folk, but I also remembered a quote from the manual of Chronicles that turned him into a pretty competent villain who almost managed to conquer the world during Christopher's time. You would think some people would have remembered that.       

   

This is quite interesting..
But i still dunno weather Cv Adventure is canon though.
Maybe he's long forgotten generation after generation..
Who knows lol

[VladCT]

Methinks it was covered up by the church post-1999.

[crisis]

But i still dunno weather Cv Adventure is canon though.

what leads you to believe otherwise?

[Reinhart77]

it passes into myth.  Chronicles manual also says "The people of Transylvania whisper the legend of Dracula to their children only half-believing it to be untrue."

[Donoffrio]

what leads you to believe otherwise?

If somebody could confirm it i suppose..

[TheouAegis]

Well, if not from Bram Stoker, no one would have known Dracula (or his offspring, as per Mizuki Shigeru) was a vampire. Maybe that's what Soma meant (not sure though, haven't actually played the Soma arc yet, still working on that bitch of a cave in OoE). Maybe he knew Dracula was a real person but thought the legends of Dracula weren't real and thus Dracula the Lord Of Darkness wasn't real. I mean, if you tell kids Dracula was a real person, you'd probably get the same reaction.

[Sumac]

Methinks it was covered up by the church post-1999.

Same here.
I am too believe that Dracula incidents and maybe even his actual existence were covered up by the church and Belmonts through the last few centuries.

However this theory doesn't sit well along with Dracula's attempt to conquer the world in 1999 and 30 years wouldn't be enough to completely forgot about some semi-immortal maniac that attacked world with monsters. Of course, maybe only select few knew where those monsters came from...like Belmonts and their close relative, Alucard, church and Hakuba priests. In short, everyone who was involved into Dracula incidents in the past.

[X]

Uh, Dracula? I thought that story was made up, actually...

This does come off as being somewhat silly on IGA's part. Virtually everybody in the world knows about Dracula and those who don't are more likely people of third world countries who're farmers and have no access to books, radio or even TV's and cellphones. If Soma's a senior student from Japan then chances are he'd know all about the real life Dracula (this is also taking into account all those nights of cram school and studying). And the only real way for the church to hide the truth from the public about Dracula would've been along the lines of 'house-cleaning'. Threats of excommunication and heresy were the biggest worries of the people back in the middle ages and if the church wanted to hush the masses up, this would have most likely been the preferred method of choice. Those that refused probably ended up in prison or under house arrest with no contact to the outside world. With regards to history Dracula would be well-known, however with regards to the vampire aspect it was undoubtedly covered up. So in effect, that which was once one person have since then become two separate entities; One at the forefront and the other hidden in the shadows.

[beingthehero]

I think if you'd ask most people on the street, they'd think Dracula was 1930's movie monster invention.

[Odile Kuronuma]

Maybe what he tried to say is that he doesn't believe in the whole Dracula being a vampire .that doesn't necessarily mean that he doesn't know that a real historical figure existed.I mean if he's in college or whatever, i'm pretty sure he had to study history and got to know that a real person called Dracula existed(Vlad Tepes).
I think it's pretty much like most people in our world who knows Dracula's name only know the fictional character, and thus think that the story was made up.I think only horror fans can really know that a real Dracula existed.
And if I'm not mistaken the Church  used stories like the vampire ones to scare people and to conduct witch hunts etc.
I think what IGA tried to do is to implement the modern vision about Dracula in AoS, since it's supposed to take place in the future. It's kinda dumb though since it's a Castlevania game and we don't want realism in our games(at least I do).

[DragonSlayr81]

I think if you'd ask most people on the street, they'd think Dracula was 1930's movie monster invention.

Pretty much this. There might be more of an awareness now considering we have things like The History Channel and such, especially documentaries that air around Halloween, but like I said in another thread, back when I was young, I'd never imagine Dracula was based on a real man. Hell, when I first found out there was a REAL Dracula, I echoed the sentiments of my entire class, "He's REAL?!!". But, for most, Bela Lugosi's depiction of Dracula is what people think of when they hear the word "Dracula". It's Lugosi's depiction that inspired vampire lore for years to come. Even Christopher Lee's portrayal was somewhat(looks) inspired by Lugosi's Dracula. We'd never have vampires with a thick accent like Lugosi, never have likes like, "I vant to drink your blood!" or characters like Count Chocula, Sesame Street's The Count or Count Floyd without Lugosi's Dracula. Hell, even CV's earliest depictions of Dracula was based on Lugosi's Dracula. Crazy cool, but because of this, Stoker's fictional character and it's pop culture "essence" is something that has far overshadowed the true historic figure. It's a strange thing, indeed.

[K.G. Morder]

Lugosi was even buried in the Dracula Costume at the request of his family, thats how big that part was. He immortalized his  Image as Dracula into public consciousness forever.

[Nagumo]

Maybe what he tried to say is that he doesn't believe in the whole Dracula being a vampire .that doesn't necessarily mean that he doesn't know that a real historical figure existed.I mean if he's in college or whatever, i'm pretty sure he had to study history and got to know that a real person called Dracula existed(Vlad Tepes).
I think it's pretty much like most people in our world who knows Dracula's name only know the fictional character, and thus think that the story was made up.I think only horror fans can really know that a real Dracula existed.
And if I'm not mistaken the Church  used stories like the vampire ones to scare people and to conduct witch hunts etc.
I think what IGA tried to do is to implement the modern vision about Dracula in AoS, since it's supposed to take place in the future. It's kinda dumb though since it's a Castlevania game and we don't want realism in our games(at least I do).

Well, I don't think Vlad Tepes exists as a historic figure in the Castlevania universe, however. It suppose it was implied in earlier games, but I believe it has now been retconned in simply a name that Dracula took. I recall from the CoD manga that they mention he was just a mysterious count that showed up someday, and not a notorious dictator or something like that. So that would kind of be a wishy-washy way of explaining it...
   

[Mooning Freddy]

Yeah, Lugosi's role was amazing. I watched a documentary about him. Dracula was not just his best role, it was his ONLY popular role. It's both interesting and sad, because when you're a one-role actor you can never play roles much different from that one role that made you popular. No matter how much you try to act differently, people would always watch you and see that character which made you popular. It kills you off as an actor. Directors wouldn't want to hire you for roles that don't fit that image the public is used to seeing you.
Lugosi's case was different. He loved being Dracula. He was good at being Dracula. The problem is, at a certain point people got sick of Dracula. And then Lugosi was doomed. Then the morphine addiction, then the rehab, then the lonely death.
But after all, Dracula is never dead.