The 101 Most Influential People Who Never Lived

Archie Bunker being more influential then DRACULA?

...RIGHT. This list just went out the window.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Denicalis

Um, yeah? Seriously, grow the fuck up and get some perspective.

Oh ho, why not insult others for their opinions?

See, I look at this like this: Archie Bunker is influential, I don't deny that, but Dracula has been responsible for the rise of the vampire as a villain and tragic anti-hero (Or in some movies, heroes in their own light against more sinister supernatural entities). There's been a series of mostly successful video-games based around taking down vampires. Movies and theater plays have regularly been made featuring, or have influences from the character (If not having a character being related to the character, or charged with slaying him, his descendant, or incarnations of the man). He's appeared in Comic Books, Novels, Anime & Manga, Television, even cartoons. Dracula is at the top of what is now an archetype for villains.

I DO have perspective and that is why I was looking at the overall picture.

You could even take a look at his 'contributions' at THIS page.

You are free to disagree with me, but please keep yourself civil.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Denicalis

You have no perspective, and that is painful. He's been influential on other fictional aspects of life. Archie Bunker is credited as bringing race relations to the forefront in the real world conversation. Beyond politics, and into the living rooms of Middle America.

And Dracula is not the earliest anti-hero. How about Apollonius' Jason? How about Marlowe's Faust? Your history is all off the scale, and you're just flat out -wrong-.

I disagree. Why don't you quit with the insults already and look at what we're discussing:

1. Fictional Aspects? He's had plenty of real-world influence. Theater Plays, Movies, Video-games, TV Shows, etc., the examples are all there. A couple examples can include The Dracula movie starring Christopher Lee gave that actor international acclaim. Buffy the Vampire Slayer drew on the myths of Vampires and since its about SLAYING vampires it draws on Dracula's weaknesses. Wes Craven's Dracula 2000/2001 offered a unique character origin story.

Even going to something as simple as Halloween, its still a popular trick-or-treat costume.

2. I specifically said that Dracula established the VAMPIRE as an anti-hero, not anti-heros in general. I think you're getting confused on the point here: Both characters were influential, but its a matter of who was MORE influential: Archie Bunker or Dracula.

Alright, let's look at Archie Bunker: As we all know, he was a bigot, disagreed heavily with his Son, and generally was distrust full of colored folk, but not because of genuine hatred, but because of how he grew up and his environment. His personal growth and outlet of (Gradual) acceptance was a clear sign of that. TV Guide even once named him as the most influential TV character of all time. As great as that acclaim may be, that's just one area of entertainment though...

Anyway, I think I'll stop here because its clear you won't take a look at my points of view, and seem to keep telling me I'm flat out wrong or I have no perspective with little to back that up... i.e., an insult, and that is not productive or enjoyable discussion for me.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

You continue to insult me here, but I'll be the civil one and respond
without resulting to such things.

Originally Posted by Denicalis

Work of fiction.
Work of fiction.
Work of fiction
WORK OF FICTION.

How are works of fiction not a part of the influence? The Character of Dracula himself is fictional, and so it would make sense that more fictional media would be produced based on that orginal character. Dracula's character himself was influenced by the real world and by historical figures. AS HAVE MANY OTHER FICTIONAL CHARACTERS BEEN, and I'll add examples and elaborate below to strengthen my point:

The first novel about Dracula by Bram Stroker was very detailed about the Transylvanian landscape... Though the tale may have Romanian roots, Bram Stoker never set foot in Romania. The truth is he never came closer to Transylvania than the reading room of the British Museum. Stoker worked for seven years on his novel, spending many hours in libraries documenting himself on the Balkan. As a result from his research the final Dracula incorporates many influences. Stoker mixed East European folklore with factual elements of Hungarian history and culture, such as the well-known historical figure of Vlad Tepes. Medical conditions not yet widely understood at the time also helped in the creation of the characters, such as a real-life disease which makes a person very sensitive to light: Porphyria. The patient suffering from this rare disease would suffer the following effects: Extreme sensitivity to sunlight, Sores and scars that break open and will not heal properly, Excessive hair growth, Tightening of skin around lips and gums (which would make the incisors more prominent).

Moving beyond that though, The Novel has never been out of print, It has inspired a century of horror writers and scores of films (about 400). The most famous among them are the silent movie "Nosferatu" by F.W. Murnau (1922), "Dracula" by Tod Browning (1931), "Dracula, Prince of Darkness" by Terence Fisher (1965), "Dance of Vampires" by R. Polanski (1967), "Nosferatu, Phantom of the Night" by Werner Herzog (1979), "Dracula" by F.F Coppola (1992) and "Interview with the Vampire" (1994).

The popularity of Dracula in today's modern (I mean the 20th Century) has also helped the Tourism of Hungary: First published in 1897, Dracula has been a best-seller around the world, including Hungary, but it wasn't published in Romania until 1990 and till recently the movie "Dance of Vampires" was forbidden in Hungary. This censorship was probably due to the negative image of Transylvania this book and this film conveyed in the eyes of the authorities.

Notably, People in Eastern Europe are not as fond of Dracula as Westerners are. When Transylvanian writer Andrei Codrescu emigrated to the USA, he was shocked to find a Romanian national hero miraculously transformed into an anti-hero, a blood-sucking vampire.

On an historical note: After President Richard Nixon came to Romania on official state visit in 1969, many American tourists followed him to Transylvania. As Dracula's story was far more famous in the USA than behind the Iron Curtain, and since the American tourists asked many questions and were so eager to learn some more about bats, coffins, sharp long teeth and bloodsucking vampires, the Romanian Minister for Culture decided to find a castle corresponding to the description Jonathan Harker gives of the castle in Stoker's novel:

Quote:

"(...) I did a little exploring in the castle. I went out on the stairs and found a room looking towards to the south. The view was magnificent, and from where I stood there was every opportunity of seeing it. The castle is on the very edge of a terrible precipice. A stone faking from the window would fall a thousand feet without touching anything! As far as the eye can reach is a sea of green tree-tops, with occasionally a deep rift where there is a chasm. Here and there are silver threads where the rivers wind in deep gorges through the forests."

The question arose where to find a suitable castle which looked "draculistic" enough and which was, if possible, close to a big city and a ski resort. The castle of Bran, 23 km southwest of Bras ov, proved to be perfect. It is situated in the surroundings of Bras ov, the second biggest city in Romania, and of Poiana Bras ov, the most famous ski resort of the country.

Built in 1377, the castle housed princes, kings and queens through the centuries, and guarded a commercial route between Wallachia and Transylvania. Between 1930 and 1947 it was used as a royal residence, and when opened in the earlier seventies it was overrun by tourists brought there by both Richard Nixon's visit, and the countless legends and stories of Dracula and Vampires in General.

Everything there at that Castle was based on a myth: in 1996 Dracula tee-shirts were on sale for five US dollars, "Vampirella squeeze bottles" appeared in 1997. Though Count Dracula never went there it looks as if everything would remember of his supernatural presence. The so-called "Dracula-Tours" at Bran are animations with macabre effects, though these effects were toned down after a tourist died of a heart attack when one staff member loomed out of a coffin. During one tour 11 Englishmen paid 8000 dollars each for the right to stand on the roof of Bran castle at night and howl. In the summer lots of busses stop in Bran and a hotel was built there especially to host foreign tourists.

Quote:

Yeah, and show me how Dracula being an anti-hero had any real world influence at all, please.

The popular Vampire Chronicles (1976-2003) series of novels by Anne Rice, employ vampires as sympathetic protagonists rather than monsters or villains. Chelsea Quinn Yarbro's massive Saint-Germain series (1978-) also features a sympathetic vampire. Rice and Yarbo set the trend for multi-volume vampire sagas which are now a stock feature of mass-market fiction. Less formulaic is Kim Newman's Anno Dracula series (1992-) which gives the genre a somewhat post-modern spin.

Taking an example from the East, Vampire Hunter D was portrayed as a lone wolf, an errant and dark white-knight who has saved villages and slayed monsters. His role in the novels were a mixed bag: D quotes Dracula's precepts ("Transient guests are we" — implied to refer to the Nobility, obviously) in the first novel. Dracula appears both as a lawgiver honored for his intelligence, who showed some interest in preserving humans, and as a ruthless scientist in the second novel, conducting hybrid breeding experiments with humans in order to perpetuate his own dwindling species.

Quote:

I imagine it isn't enjoyable when someone calls you out for having an opinion that's so ass backwards that it's laughable.

And yet, I only see YOU viciously attacking my comments. Funny enough, its your OPINON that my OPINON is "ass backwards". Its just a conjecture of my own, but perhaps you have some sort of ulterior motive in such a vivid disagreement with me? After all if you simply had said something to the effect of "Dark Nation, I think your opinion is wrong, and I'll show you here why that is: ", Instead of just saying that "Dracula isn't influential and Archie Bunker is" while calling me names (Not an exact quote but the message is the same). For the record, my opinon is NOT ass-backwards, and it may probably only be laughable to you.

Quote:

Dracula inspired lots of other fictional worlds, sure. But he has not had the sort of on the ground ramifications of Archie Bunker. This isn't even a question. This is so obvious it slaps you in the face.

Saying something is true without evidence does not make it true. Its very much a question.

Quote:

But he has not had the sort of on the ground ramifications of Archie Bunker.

While I'd love to ask that question, I think you mistyped right there, so I'm not exactly sure what you were trying to say, could you rephrase that please?

But, (If in the above quoted text) if you're saying that Archie Bunker had a much bigger influence (I know you have elsewhere, I mean is that the point you were making in the above quoted text, or were you talking about something else? ) then please show me examples, as I have to you.

I'm probably wasting my time typing all of this. (In b4 more Insults by you).

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by nuttyturnip

The question is really your definition of "influential". If by influential, you mean he was a catalyst for spotlighting and reforming social problems, then Archie Bunker wins. If influential simply means how many people have heard of you, then Dracula easily wins. Hell, I was born in the US in 1978 and didn't know who Archie Bunker was until I was an older teenager, but everyone knows Dracula.

This. I'm guessing we both took different definitions of influential and
thus the hard-lined arguments on who was more of it.

If you want to think you "won" Deni, go right ahead. I know In my mind
that both characters were influential and as a fresh voice has pointed out: This is all really just quite silly.
For the record, yes I have seen a couple episodes of All In the Family.

Originally Posted by nuttyturnip

Why are we arguing Dracula and Archie Bunker, anyway? They're both influential in their own way. The bigger question is, who did Buck Rogers influence, other than Daffy Duck?

Exactly, and for that I'm done with this topic. I still think I was correct though.

The author and the list itself is who we should be complaining about, not the placement of characters on it.
Anyway, I'm done (Now I remember why I never go into the Political Palace )

I was speaking idiomatically.