Norman Bates vs Count Orlok


Guest

  

11 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Norman Bates

Halloween_Psycho.jpg

Powers: Average, yet psychotic, human

Voted: Best smile

Equivalent Smiley: 1933.jpg

vs

Count Orlok

111364.jpg

Powers: Otherworldly and mostly undefined, standard vampiric abilities, signs of telekinesis

Voted: Quietest

Equivalent Smiley: th_vampire-smiley-019.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In before all the "but Bates is REAL" arguments.

It doesn't matter. Orlok is an icon, he's fucking terrifying and he'll never be duplicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Psycho is a great film. No doubt. It is, however, overrated. There are others that do it just as well from the same era.

Bates is fantastic.

But he just hasn't proven to have the longevity of Orlok, who has defined a subgenre for eternity. Look at the stills from the film and it looks as though it is a real picture of a vampire. It hasn't been done as well since and will never be done as well as Nosferatu. Not even Klaus Kinski could outcreep the creepy Max Screck (whose very name means "fear").

Orlok wins this round for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And in response to the "he's real" argument. He is even more of an adaptation than Orlok is. He is taken from a book (better than the movie) basing the character on a menagerie of real-life killers (all scarier than Bates).

Stoker's widow wouldn't allow an adaptation of Dracula so they changed him radically and made him better. No contest here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.