In Dracula II the "main character" (presumed to be Dracula/Judas Iscariot) referenced other identities he's traveled throughout in Europe. As he was pretending to be. One of these was Uther.
I was a student of English literature and never have ever heard of "Uther", being refered as being evil and I have to presume the "Uther" refered to is as another "Pendragon". The only other one was otherwise known was as Uther Pendragon, better known as King Arthur's father.
I have never heard of his being refered to as a "dragon"" or as a "vampire".
I don't know why they went there.
I knew that Arthur was the half brother (by Uther) of his half sister Morgaine (or Morgan le Fay). An evil witch.
Perhaps many of you can help me on the rest!
But why is he mentioned in the Vampire lore of Suisson and Lussier?
I'm not sure why they identified Dracula with Uther. It's an interesting scene; Dracula also mentions that he was Gilles de Rais, Vlad Tepes, El Hazarid, Dagobert, Proximus and Caligula. I don't know who El Hazarid and Proximus are supposed to be.
I suppose there's something in Pendragon (chief dragon) and Dracula (son of the dragon).
In Dracula 2000 we see that Judas is played by Gerard Butler, and two thousand years later is still Gerard Butler. This would imply that Uther, Caligua, Gilles de Rais and all the rest looked exactly the same, which seems unlikely. Remember that Merlin transformed Uther into the image of Gorlois so he could sleep with Igraine? So Uther is no stranger to changing his face.
I live for two things. 1-science fiction. 2-reruns. (\___/)MAKE BUNNY UR SIG (='.'=) (")_(")
Although he alluded to Caligula, he never actually mentioned him. Though it would have been a wonderful idea. As Judas/The Wandering Jew (the famous figure in early English literature for the sake of any other identifying characteristic), might have perhaps encountered Macro (who was a veteran of the Galliean Wars), who would in time become Caligula's chief lieutenant (until Caligula became so paranoid as to kill him also).
It is possible that Macro/Judas infected Caligula and then took his identity. Caligula was "bloodthirsty" And BLOOD THIRSTY. As was written by Tacitus, Plutarch, and (especially) Suetonius, he even ate his unborn son (by his sister Drucilla), which he ripped out of her womb while they both still lived, so that he wouldn't supplant him in the heavens, as the replacement for Zeus...He was aware that Jupiter was only a poor copy of Zeus. And identified himself as Zeus. This was depicted, rather graphically in Robert Graves' "I Claudius".
Proximus is, perhaps a stand-in for a Roman nobleman (though as I mentioned earlier, Macro would have served just as well). El Hazarid, was perhaps a stand-in for Mohammed (as to not offend the Muslim community). The other characters are real names from history/mythology.
But the timelines were very poorly thought out. Gilles de Rais was hanged in 1440. When Vlad was almost 9 years old. (Reminds me of our current Presidential Campaign about Obama and Bill Ayers).
The timeline they mention works. Up to THAT point. Then it gets muddled. Luccier and Soisson DIDN'T do their homework.
Interesting point you made about Uther. But lets not forget that first and foremost that Dracula is a "shape-shifter". To go from bat. To wolf. To motes of dust in the moonlight. I didn't have too much of a problem with that per-se. But you did mention Butler playing the part from the mid-1st Century until approximately 1897. Which does give me a problem. That and the fact that in the book, Harker tried to behead him with a shovel. But missed and left a deep gash in his forehead (which never healed throughout the remainder of the book).
Sort of put a damper on Butler's version of just pulling out the bullets, when his Dracula was shot. And leaving no scars!
I think he does actually mention Caligula, he just pronounces it strangely (the Dutch subtitles certainly say Caligula :-p). Let's have a look at this timeline:
c. end of 1st century BC - c. mid 1st century AD: Judas Iscariot 12 AD - 41 AD: Caligula probably some point before 476: Proximus probably around 476: Uther probably some point after 476: El Hazarid probably 600s: Dagobert 1404 - 1440: Gilles de Rais 1431 - 1476: Vlad Tepes
Hmmm. Well, perhaps the childhoods of these figures do not occur in this timeline.
An interesting point: Gilles de Rais was hanged, which should have killed Judas! (Or at least made him susceptible to other factors such as sunlight.) And then, of course, Vlad Tepes was beheaded. He would probably have had to be beheaded with the noose still round his neck for it to work, though.
I live for two things. 1-science fiction. 2-reruns. (\___/)MAKE BUNNY UR SIG (='.'=) (")_(")
well I know all of this is fiction, but if I was the writer of the story, or if I use a logic reason, I will say that judas punishment was that... being thirsty for blood and unable to die... no matter what...
so all those years and centuries that he has been living, in reality is a punishment from god, and in reality he doesnt enjoy his punishment.. he doesnt enjoy being thirsty for blood all the time.. and all he wants is to die and have some peace... but he just cant, because that is part of his punishment... being alive and alone forever and with a neverending thirst for blood that he just cant control.. living in the darkness of the night.. so I think that it doesnt matter if you hang him, burn him, behead him.. he just will not die.. and not because he wish not to..just because that is his curse forever... even maybe survive the end of times and be just all alone in the darkness... I also question myself how after all those years he hasnt just lost his mind completely... this is just my opinion.. and it is indeed a very cruel punishment if you look at it that way.. I dont think nobody will enjoy being alive forever, alone, in the dark and have to drink blood all the time just because you have to, you need to.. like an addict needs his drugs.. just that there is no detox for this.. no rehab
by the way, I think the El Hazarid was probably a reference to H.P. Lovecraft's recurring character Abdul ALHAZRED, the "Mad Arab," and perhaps the author of the Necronomicon.
I rarely learn something from an IMDB msg board conversation, but you guys may have had the most intelligent conversation i've ever seen around here. Kudos, I've never seen the films, the first didn't interest me a bit, but after reading a little into the movies, I want to watch them all.
If you read the beginning of Le Morte d'Arthur, you will easily see how one might very well describe Uther Pendragon as evil. He falls in love with the wife of the duke of Cornwall and conspires to have his way with her while the duke is visiting. The wife suspects as much and begs her husband that they leave with all haste, which they do. The duke places his wife in the castle Tintagil, while he himself retreats to the castle Terrabil. Next, Uther becomes "wonderly wroth", and sets forth to besiege the duke's castle. During the siege, Merlin casts a spell which gives Uther the physical appearance of the duke of Cornwall, and boldly enters castle Tintagil as the duke, and has his way with the wife. The real duke is later slain, and Uther takes the widow - the fair Igraine, future mother of Arthur - for his own wife.