HOME | DD

Description

Well, I didn’t think I’d be making this one so soon after someone requested it. XD

ANYWAY...I’ve actually had this list on my mind for a while, and, more on a whim than anything else, I decided I might as well make it. A long time back, I made a list of My Top 12 Favorite Portrayals of Count Dracula - one of popular culture’s most recognizable horror icons, and one of literature’s most diabolical and mysterious villains. Dracula is one of my favorite characters, and has been played by some of my favorite actors...but there are other characters in Bram Stoker’s classic novel that are worthy of note. In fact, it is my strong opinion that “Dracula” has some of the most memorable characters of any horror novel, which is perhaps one of the reasons it has stood the test of time. Jonathan & Mina Harker, Lucy Westenra, Dr. Seward, Arthur Holmwood, the often-overlooked Quincey Morris...and, of course, Professor Abraham Van Helsing.
Van Helsing is ostensibly Dracula’s arch-nemesis, and the one who leads the fight against the forces of evil in the novel. What is most interesting is that, in the book, this is not due to any personal vendetta or secret knowledge on Van Helsing’s part, but simply due to simple wisdom: Van Helsing is a scientist who understands that, as Sherlock Holmes once put it, once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, must be the truth. Therefore, if medical know-how can’t find a solution, then only supernatural means must be left. However, in other media, he is often depicted in a decidedly different light: not as simply a wise, if eccentric, doctor, but an obsessive monster hunter who hunts Dracula and his disciples down with cold-blooded vengeance. However you look at him, regardless, he is quite possibly the most beloved character in Stoker’s book after the Count himself, and may have been the character Stoker, himself, had a personal favoritism for (both Van Helsing and Abraham “Bram” Stoker shared the same first name).

There are not as many reimaginings of Van Helsing as there are of Count Dracula, and not all of those that are out there are actually that great or that focused-on, so this list will be shorter than my list of Draculas. However, I still feel it’s worth giving the Prince of Darkness’ most feared opponent some time in the sunlight. So, grab a torch and prepare to descend into a Transylvanian crypt! These are My Top 10 Portrayals of Professor Van Helsing.

10. Nigel Davenport, from the 1973 film.
Directed by Dan Curtis of “Dark Shadows” fame, this film is something of an underrated gem in the Dracula archives, so to speak. It stars Jack Palance in the role of the Count; Palance is a somewhat unlikely Dracula, but still quite good. The rest of the cast is pretty solid, too. Case in point: Nigel Davenport as Professor Van Helsing. Now, Van Helsing in the novel is a Dutchman, but several adaptations make him either German or English. This one is of the latter category. Davenport’s Van Helsing is a bit on the stuffy, stiff side; at first glance, he is, in essence, the typical Victorian gentleman, with nothing really unusual about him at all. However, when the time comes to take on the King of the Vampires, his Van Helsing manages to keep his conviction and his cool under even the most dire circumstances, and guides the way for Arthur Holmwood in the battle against darkness. At times his stiff-upper-lipped, almost stereotypically-British demeanor gets to be a bit too much, but generally speaking, he is a surprisingly casual and cool Van Helsing, and the film’s quality overall is just as much to his credit as his antagonist.

9. Hugh Jackman, from Van Helsing.
I recently talked about this character/film on another list, so I’ll make this as quick as I can. This movie is a guilty pleasure for me; a rather bombastic tribute to the classic Universal “Monster Mash” movies of yore, but with an action-adventure twist, it was panned by critics, and most audiences didn’t seem to favor it, either. While I will concede that the film is EXTREMELY flawed, I still get a kick out of it; it’s just so unashamedly over-the-top and absolutely crazy that one can’t help but get sucked into the madness, so to speak. I also have to say that Jackman’s performance in the title role is actually pretty intense and fun to watch. Hot off of playing Wolverine at the time of this film (in fact, I’m almost certain the creators would have made Van Helsing into Logan, if they could have), this Van Helsing - renamed Gabriel as opposed to Abraham - is not a professor, but instead a Holy Warrior; a mysterious monster hunter who serves a secret religious order, and is sent to Transylvania to eliminate Count Dracula and his brides. Along the way, he encounters other horror icons, such as Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde, Frankenstein’s Monster & Igor, and of course a Werewolf. The character owes very little to Stoker’s original concept, aside from fighting Dracula and being called Van Helsing, but that doesn’t make him any less fun to watch, mostly due to Jackman’s personal work as a performer. You can tell he’s having fun with the role, no matter how bad the movie gets, and he carries everything with surprising conviction. If nothing else in the movie worked, Van Helsing himself was at least one heck of an action hero to enjoy.

8. Anthony Hopkins, from the 1992 film.
Speaking of over-the-top films and performances, Hopkins’ Van Helsing is about as crazy as it gets. In this rather gory adaptation of the story, Van Helsing is slightly retooled; instead of simply being an eccentric scientist, he seems totally obsessed with destroying Dracula and his minions, to the point of absolute madness. I actually rather like this concept; this is a more sympathetic take on Dracula than most, though still decidedly villainous, and Van Helsing rather unhinged characterization in this film helps blur the line between the hero and the villain a bit more. While he can be reasonable, and is clearly just out to do what he thinks is right, and can even be caring when the time calls for it, his interactions with the vampires range between coldness beyond compare and absolutely demented, babbling ravings. He’s less like a doctor and more like a mad priest. The performance is rather melodramatic on Hopkins’ part, but a.) that’s not actually that unusual for this actor, and b.) it’s equally commonplace for this film as a whole, to say nothing of Dracula as a whole. So...eh. I’ll give it a pass. Besides, Hannibal Lecter fighting Commissioner Gordon as Dracula? What’s not to love about that?!

7. Laurence Olivier, from the 1979 film.
One of the most famous Shakespearean actors of all time in the role of the world’s most famous vampire slayer. How can you go wrong with that set-up? Olivier was quite old and hardly in the best health when this film came out, but he threw his all into the part and relished it deeply. I have to confess that I’ve never been much of a fan of Frank Langella’s Count Dracula; for those that absolutely love him, I can understand why, and more power to you, but I just never found him as interesting or as powerful as many people apparently did, and still do. Olivier as Van Helsing, however...that’s another story. Much like with Hopkins, the lines of good and evil are a bit more blurred here, as this Dracula is once again painted in a more sympathetic and romantic light than some. However, in this case, Van Helsing’s reason for going after Dracula is a bit more personal, and leads to some really intense moments; rather than simply being a newcomer on the scene, or having some ancient vendetta against the Count, Van Helsing is instead depicted as the father of Dracula’s first English female victim, and is forced to kill his own daughter when she is turned into a vampire. As opposed to Hopkins, who is more of an obsessed Looney Tune, this Van Helsing you can totally understand in terms of his passion and his fury; Dracula isn’t just a monster bent on hurting the world, he’s also the monster that stole and destroyed his daughter. From that perspective, it doesn’t matter how sympathetic this Dracula is - in Van Helsing’s eyes, he does not deserve to wander through this world any longer, and you really can’t blame him for feeling that way. It’s one of the few times where Van Helsing was perhaps more interesting than Dracula himself, and for that, Olivier’s tragic professor is to be commended.

6. Thomas Kretschmann, from the NBC series.
This short-lived, single-season-long show was...weird. I can’t say I didn’t enjoy it, but I can safely say I understand why it didn’t last very long. In it, rather than being nemeses from the start, Dracula and Van Helsing actually start out as allies; both are out for revenge on a secret organization known as The Order of the Dragon, as both have had their lives ruined by the Order. In the case of Van Helsing, he was a member of the Order who turned his coat. The Order, in vengeance, murdered his whole family, even going so far as to burn his poor children alive...and making him watch. Driven practically insane by this, Van Helsing resurrects the Order’s old foe, Count Dracula (played by Jonathan Rhys Meyers), and forms an alliance with him to take down the Order of the Dragon. As the show goes on, however, their unsteady alliance crumbles bit by bit, more and more, as Van Helsing’s lust for vengeance begins to consume him, and Dracula himself gets entangled in all sorts of matters involving the Harkers and the Order itself. It’s a rather convoluted series, in some places, and even though it only lasted a paltry ten episodes, a LOT happens in that short amount of time. Kretschmann’s Van Helsing is definitely the most interesting character to watch; once again, much like with Olivier and Hopkins, the lines of good and evil are blurred, which seems to be something of a theme for this particular series. Even though Dracula is a bloodthirsty vampire, he’s less of a villain and more of an anti-hero in the story of the show; the Order of the Dragon are certainly a bunch of fiends, but they aren’t pure evil, either. Van Helsing is much the same; rather than being the convicted monster hunter of cinema past, or the wise medical practicioner from Stoker’s novel, he’s more of a morally gray almost mad-scientist-type of figure, whose obsession with destroying the Order is only matched by his intense study of vampires. He’s interesting, but also rather chilling, and it’s interesting seeing the classic relationship between the vampire and the professor twisted in the way it is in this show. Kretschmann plays the role perfectly; I actually wouldn’t mind seeing him play a more traditional Van Helsing in the future, if such an opportunity presents itself. Until then, this rather odd but still rather fascinating take on the character will have to do.

5. Herbert Lom, from the 1970 film.
So, fun fact: originally, Van Helsing in this film was to be played by VINCENT-FREAKING-PRICE, but for some reason that never went through (I believe Price was busy with other projects at the time this was being filmed). While seeing Price as Van Helsing, especially paired off against Christopher Lee as Count Dracula, would have been AMAZING...I have to say, Herbert Lom wasn’t a bad choice for a replacement. While Lom is perhaps best known today for his comedic roles, such as playing Chief Inspector Dreyfus in the Pink Panther film series, he was actually a rather versatile performer, and no stranger to horror movies; like Lee himself, he was a Hammer alumni, for a start, having played the Phantom of the Opera in Hammer’s 1962 adaptation of the story. The way Lom’s relationship with Dracula is handled in the film is actually pretty interesting. In here, he’s the head of the sanitarium in the story (Dr. Seward is his associate, rather than the head psychiatrist himself), and even though he is a man of science, he has a secret obsession with the world of darkness. His study is filled with ancient texts, spellbooks, dark legends, and untold knowledge. He knows vampires better than anybody...and that study of darkness seems to have a power over him. “I have never met the Count,” Van Helsing says at one point, grimly, “And yet I feel...I know him better than my own soul.” When Lom’s Van Helsing comes face to face with Dracula for the first (and only) time in the movie, he seems awestruck, and utters, “All my life I have studied the black arts. It is strange to finally confront the Prince of Darkness himself.” In short, the idea seems to be that when Van Helsing looks at Dracula, he isn’t just seeing a monster to be destroyed; he sees a mirror image, almost a dark reflection of his own desires. But while Van Helsing fights to save people with his treatments and his knowledge, his own form of mortal power, Dracula uses his supernatural abilities to get what he wants and go where he pleases. This makes the battle feel more personal, while still owing to Stoker’s concept of the characters. In the book, Dracula and Van Helsing don’t really meet face to face very often, and neither have encountered one another before. Lom turns in a magnificent performance; very thoughtful and enigmatic, but with something of a tender side, which perfectly matches Lee’s own work as Dracula. Ironically, the two actors actually never met face to face behind the scenes; even in the one scene where they encounter each other, the two were filmed at separate times. Frankly, if I hadn’t found this out after the fact, I would never have guessed; their work is that splendid. It’s just another thing that made this rather underrated Dracula film so special.

4. Frank Finlay, from the 1977 film.
This is undoubtedly the most accurate-to-the-book Van Helsing of them all. Finlay was largely known for being a more comedic actor, playing such characters as Porthos in Richard Lester’s Three Musketeers trilogy, and Inspector Lestrade in two separate Sherlock Holmes movies, among other parts. As Van Helsing, that clownish side of him is brought to bear, as his heavy accent and slightly neurotic characterization makes for a deceptively amusing figure in the story. However, when he needs to get serious, he is deadly serious (no pun intended), and you never once question his wisdom, even if he is rather eccentric and a little silly. Much like in the book, he isn’t depicted as an experienced vampire hunter or some sort of obsessive zealot; he’s just a guy who knows that when he can’t explain something, the inexplicable must be responsible. As a result, he’s just as much an amateur as the rest of the guys in the story. It’s his understanding of vampire folklore that really makes him the authority in the group, as well as his more scientific side. A somewhat more comical take on the character, perhaps, but no less interesting for all that.

3. The Version from the 2006 BBC Radio Play.
No actor was credited with playing Van Helsing in this radio play, which is an enormous shame, because whoever did the work here was ASTONISHINGLY good. In a cast including such talents as Jon Glover as Renfield, David Suchet as the Count, and Tom Hiddleston (yes, Loki lovers, THAT Tom Hiddleston) as Jonathan Harker, Mr. Anonymous here really holds his own quite strongly. This is what would happen if you gave Frank Finlay’s Van Helsing a bit less of a comedic streak; once again, this is a take that’s closer to the book, but while Finlay seems to be grasping for straws and occasionally coming out on top - which is, admittedly, quite fun to watch and experience - this Van Helsing starts out on top and never drops. He’s authoritative, powerful, commanding, and confident; he’s easily a match for the devilish Dracula, who has all these same attributes. While Finlay’s Van Helsing is a bit of a Doctor-Who-esque figure - someone who is deceptively amusing and strange while able to also be stone-cold serious - this Van Helsing has little time for jokes. He may not be experienced as a monster hunter, but he takes the position quite seriously, and knows there is no time to get befuddled or bamboozled; the entire world is in danger! With that said, he does have a soft, even sort of sweet side to him, and acts almost like a mentor to some of the other characters in this audio drama. In short: I don’t know who played the good professor in this version, but I truly wish I did!

2. Edward Van Sloan, from the 1931 film.
In my opinion, what made the 1931 film version of Dracula work so well - beyond ANYTHING else, and that’s actually saying more than you might realize - it was the relationship between Bela Lugosi’s Dracula and Edward Van Sloan’s Abraham Van Helsing. (How oddly similar those names sound…) The film expanded on Dracula’s role in the story, and slightly retooled Van Helsing’s own role, as well. This was where the concept of the two as arch-foes really became the focus of the story; the way these two talk to and about each other feels different from any other version of these two characters. It reminds me very strongly of Sherlock Holmes and Professor Moriarty; Van Helsing’s cold, slightly eccentric genius pitted against Dracula’s experience and evil power. These two titanic egos just grappling for control. Nowhere is this more evident than one particularly powerful scene where Dracula tries to use hypnosis to ensnare Van Helsing. The professor nearly falls for it, taking a few steps towards the Count...but then gets ahold of himself, and backs away with a slight smirk. The actors are a big part of what makes this relationship work; Lugosi and Sloan both had played their respective roles against each other dozens of times onstage in a Broadway production of Dracula, which was actually the inspiration for the film. In the movie, the two were playing the same parts, but now had years of knowledge about one another, and more time to play off one another in the actual story. I’m honestly amazed that, because of this, Van Sloan remains less well-known when compared to Lugosi...especially considering Van Sloan’s career took off just as much as his onscreen rival’s, as he appeared in somewhat similar roles in both “Frankenstein” and “The Mummy,” among other appearances. In this role, he is wonderfully composed and just as compelling as Dwight Frye’s psychotic Renfield or even Lugosi’s sophisticated Count, and it is these three specific performances, above all else, that really help this black-and-white classic stand the test of time.

But as wonderful as the great Edward Van Sloan is...it’s no surprise who my choice for number one would be...

1. Peter Cushing, from the Hammer Horror series.
How could it not be Peter Cushing in this slot? When one thinks the name “Van Helsing,” his name is usually not far behind it, and vice-versa. Having played the role no less than five times throughout several pictures in Hammer Horror’s Dracula series, this was the original action-loving monster hunter. He was essentially Van Sloan on steroids, or a proto-Hugh Jackman. He could be dapper and reasonable and even very gentle, but once he was on the hunt, he was unstoppable and ready for a fight. The coldness with which he deals with Lucy when she is transformed, to say nothing of Dracula himself, is actually just as chilling as the vampires themselves can be, but he makes it clear that this is all in the name of the greater good. And even though he’s clearly obsessed, he doesn’t come off as a madman or even all that bizarre; the absolute confidence and unwavering discipline with which Peter Cushing delivers his lines and holds his posture makes him truly a powerhouse character. He’s resourceful and cunning, a perfect match for the rather beastly Dracula of these stories. He took the wisdom of Stoker’s character, the stalwart ego of Edward Van Sloan, and mixed it with his own vivacity and sense of elegance to create perhaps the ultimate vampire slayer. Move over, Buffy! When it comes to smiting the powers of evil, it’s no real secret why Peter Cushing takes the cake as My Favorite Portrayal of Professor Van Helsing.

Honorable Mentions Include…
David Suchet, from the 2006 film.
Released the same year as the BBC Radio Play, wherein Suchet played Dracula himself, this BBC T.V. movie featured the actor as the good professor instead. The most notable thing about this movie is that Van Helsing’s character is combined, curiously enough, with the character of Renfield, as Van Helsing is depicted as a vampire expert who has been driven half-insane after an encounter with Dracula, and is forced to leave his hermit-like life to take charge in the battle against the Count’s dark power. It’s a unique spin on things, to say the least.

Walter Ladengast, from Nosferatu the Vampyre.
This remake, produced in the late 1970s, of the classic film “Nosferatu,” features a very different Van Helsing from basically any other version. Instead of being a man wise enough to believe in superstition when nobody else will, Van Helsing is instead changed into a skeptic; a man of science who refuses to believe in the supernatural, and must learn to accept the impossible as real. I am not sure why the decision was made to turn the character so topsy-turvy in this manner, but if the BBC can combine Van Helsing with Renfield, I guess anything goes. It’s still a fun character, and a fun performance, and was certainly a welcome change from the original film, where the presumed Van Helsing character - Dr. Bulwer - was barely even present.

Description

Well, I didn’t think I’d be making this one so soon after someone requested it. XD

ANYWAY...I’ve actually had this list on my mind for a while, and, more on a whim than anything else, I decided I might as well make it. A long time back, I made a list of My Top 12 Favorite Portrayals of Count Dracula - one of popular culture’s most recognizable horror icons, and one of literature’s most diabolical and mysterious villains. Dracula is one of my favorite characters, and has been played by some of my favorite actors...but there are other characters in Bram Stoker’s classic novel that are worthy of note. In fact, it is my strong opinion that “Dracula” has some of the most memorable characters of any horror novel, which is perhaps one of the reasons it has stood the test of time. Jonathan & Mina Harker, Lucy Westenra, Dr. Seward, Arthur Holmwood, the often-overlooked Quincey Morris...and, of course, Professor Abraham Van Helsing.
Van Helsing is ostensibly Dracula’s arch-nemesis, and the one who leads the fight against the forces of evil in the novel. What is most interesting is that, in the book, this is not due to any personal vendetta or secret knowledge on Van Helsing’s part, but simply due to simple wisdom: Van Helsing is a scientist who understands that, as Sherlock Holmes once put it, once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, must be the truth. Therefore, if medical know-how can’t find a solution, then only supernatural means must be left. However, in other media, he is often depicted in a decidedly different light: not as simply a wise, if eccentric, doctor, but an obsessive monster hunter who hunts Dracula and his disciples down with cold-blooded vengeance. However you look at him, regardless, he is quite possibly the most beloved character in Stoker’s book after the Count himself, and may have been the character Stoker, himself, had a personal favoritism for (both Van Helsing and Abraham “Bram” Stoker shared the same first name).

There are not as many reimaginings of Van Helsing as there are of Count Dracula, and not all of those that are out there are actually that great or that focused-on, so this list will be shorter than my list of Draculas. However, I still feel it’s worth giving the Prince of Darkness’ most feared opponent some time in the sunlight. So, grab a torch and prepare to descend into a Transylvanian crypt! These are My Top 10 Portrayals of Professor Van Helsing.

10. Nigel Davenport, from the 1973 film.
Directed by Dan Curtis of “Dark Shadows” fame, this film is something of an underrated gem in the Dracula archives, so to speak. It stars Jack Palance in the role of the Count; Palance is a somewhat unlikely Dracula, but still quite good. The rest of the cast is pretty solid, too. Case in point: Nigel Davenport as Professor Van Helsing. Now, Van Helsing in the novel is a Dutchman, but several adaptations make him either German or English. This one is of the latter category. Davenport’s Van Helsing is a bit on the stuffy, stiff side; at first glance, he is, in essence, the typical Victorian gentleman, with nothing really unusual about him at all. However, when the time comes to take on the King of the Vampires, his Van Helsing manages to keep his conviction and his cool under even the most dire circumstances, and guides the way for Arthur Holmwood in the battle against darkness. At times his stiff-upper-lipped, almost stereotypically-British demeanor gets to be a bit too much, but generally speaking, he is a surprisingly casual and cool Van Helsing, and the film’s quality overall is just as much to his credit as his antagonist.

9. Hugh Jackman, from Van Helsing.
I recently talked about this character/film on another list, so I’ll make this as quick as I can. This movie is a guilty pleasure for me; a rather bombastic tribute to the classic Universal “Monster Mash” movies of yore, but with an action-adventure twist, it was panned by critics, and most audiences didn’t seem to favor it, either. While I will concede that the film is EXTREMELY flawed, I still get a kick out of it; it’s just so unashamedly over-the-top and absolutely crazy that one can’t help but get sucked into the madness, so to speak. I also have to say that Jackman’s performance in the title role is actually pretty intense and fun to watch. Hot off of playing Wolverine at the time of this film (in fact, I’m almost certain the creators would have made Van Helsing into Logan, if they could have), this Van Helsing - renamed Gabriel as opposed to Abraham - is not a professor, but instead a Holy Warrior; a mysterious monster hunter who serves a secret religious order, and is sent to Transylvania to eliminate Count Dracula and his brides. Along the way, he encounters other horror icons, such as Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde, Frankenstein’s Monster & Igor, and of course a Werewolf. The character owes very little to Stoker’s original concept, aside from fighting Dracula and being called Van Helsing, but that doesn’t make him any less fun to watch, mostly due to Jackman’s personal work as a performer. You can tell he’s having fun with the role, no matter how bad the movie gets, and he carries everything with surprising conviction. If nothing else in the movie worked, Van Helsing himself was at least one heck of an action hero to enjoy.

8. Anthony Hopkins, from the 1992 film.
Speaking of over-the-top films and performances, Hopkins’ Van Helsing is about as crazy as it gets. In this rather gory adaptation of the story, Van Helsing is slightly retooled; instead of simply being an eccentric scientist, he seems totally obsessed with destroying Dracula and his minions, to the point of absolute madness. I actually rather like this concept; this is a more sympathetic take on Dracula than most, though still decidedly villainous, and Van Helsing rather unhinged characterization in this film helps blur the line between the hero and the villain a bit more. While he can be reasonable, and is clearly just out to do what he thinks is right, and can even be caring when the time calls for it, his interactions with the vampires range between coldness beyond compare and absolutely demented, babbling ravings. He’s less like a doctor and more like a mad priest. The performance is rather melodramatic on Hopkins’ part, but a.) that’s not actually that unusual for this actor, and b.) it’s equally commonplace for this film as a whole, to say nothing of Dracula as a whole. So...eh. I’ll give it a pass. Besides, Hannibal Lecter fighting Commissioner Gordon as Dracula? What’s not to love about that?!

7. Laurence Olivier, from the 1979 film.
One of the most famous Shakespearean actors of all time in the role of the world’s most famous vampire slayer. How can you go wrong with that set-up? Olivier was quite old and hardly in the best health when this film came out, but he threw his all into the part and relished it deeply. I have to confess that I’ve never been much of a fan of Frank Langella’s Count Dracula; for those that absolutely love him, I can understand why, and more power to you, but I just never found him as interesting or as powerful as many people apparently did, and still do. Olivier as Van Helsing, however...that’s another story. Much like with Hopkins, the lines of good and evil are a bit more blurred here, as this Dracula is once again painted in a more sympathetic and romantic light than some. However, in this case, Van Helsing’s reason for going after Dracula is a bit more personal, and leads to some really intense moments; rather than simply being a newcomer on the scene, or having some ancient vendetta against the Count, Van Helsing is instead depicted as the father of Dracula’s first English female victim, and is forced to kill his own daughter when she is turned into a vampire. As opposed to Hopkins, who is more of an obsessed Looney Tune, this Van Helsing you can totally understand in terms of his passion and his fury; Dracula isn’t just a monster bent on hurting the world, he’s also the monster that stole and destroyed his daughter. From that perspective, it doesn’t matter how sympathetic this Dracula is - in Van Helsing’s eyes, he does not deserve to wander through this world any longer, and you really can’t blame him for feeling that way. It’s one of the few times where Van Helsing was perhaps more interesting than Dracula himself, and for that, Olivier’s tragic professor is to be commended.

6. Thomas Kretschmann, from the NBC series.
This short-lived, single-season-long show was...weird. I can’t say I didn’t enjoy it, but I can safely say I understand why it didn’t last very long. In it, rather than being nemeses from the start, Dracula and Van Helsing actually start out as allies; both are out for revenge on a secret organization known as The Order of the Dragon, as both have had their lives ruined by the Order. In the case of Van Helsing, he was a member of the Order who turned his coat. The Order, in vengeance, murdered his whole family, even going so far as to burn his poor children alive...and making him watch. Driven practically insane by this, Van Helsing resurrects the Order’s old foe, Count Dracula (played by Jonathan Rhys Meyers), and forms an alliance with him to take down the Order of the Dragon. As the show goes on, however, their unsteady alliance crumbles bit by bit, more and more, as Van Helsing’s lust for vengeance begins to consume him, and Dracula himself gets entangled in all sorts of matters involving the Harkers and the Order itself. It’s a rather convoluted series, in some places, and even though it only lasted a paltry ten episodes, a LOT happens in that short amount of time. Kretschmann’s Van Helsing is definitely the most interesting character to watch; once again, much like with Olivier and Hopkins, the lines of good and evil are blurred, which seems to be something of a theme for this particular series. Even though Dracula is a bloodthirsty vampire, he’s less of a villain and more of an anti-hero in the story of the show; the Order of the Dragon are certainly a bunch of fiends, but they aren’t pure evil, either. Van Helsing is much the same; rather than being the convicted monster hunter of cinema past, or the wise medical practicioner from Stoker’s novel, he’s more of a morally gray almost mad-scientist-type of figure, whose obsession with destroying the Order is only matched by his intense study of vampires. He’s interesting, but also rather chilling, and it’s interesting seeing the classic relationship between the vampire and the professor twisted in the way it is in this show. Kretschmann plays the role perfectly; I actually wouldn’t mind seeing him play a more traditional Van Helsing in the future, if such an opportunity presents itself. Until then, this rather odd but still rather fascinating take on the character will have to do.

5. Herbert Lom, from the 1970 film.
So, fun fact: originally, Van Helsing in this film was to be played by VINCENT-FREAKING-PRICE, but for some reason that never went through (I believe Price was busy with other projects at the time this was being filmed). While seeing Price as Van Helsing, especially paired off against Christopher Lee as Count Dracula, would have been AMAZING...I have to say, Herbert Lom wasn’t a bad choice for a replacement. While Lom is perhaps best known today for his comedic roles, such as playing Chief Inspector Dreyfus in the Pink Panther film series, he was actually a rather versatile performer, and no stranger to horror movies; like Lee himself, he was a Hammer alumni, for a start, having played the Phantom of the Opera in Hammer’s 1962 adaptation of the story. The way Lom’s relationship with Dracula is handled in the film is actually pretty interesting. In here, he’s the head of the sanitarium in the story (Dr. Seward is his associate, rather than the head psychiatrist himself), and even though he is a man of science, he has a secret obsession with the world of darkness. His study is filled with ancient texts, spellbooks, dark legends, and untold knowledge. He knows vampires better than anybody...and that study of darkness seems to have a power over him. “I have never met the Count,” Van Helsing says at one point, grimly, “And yet I feel...I know him better than my own soul.” When Lom’s Van Helsing comes face to face with Dracula for the first (and only) time in the movie, he seems awestruck, and utters, “All my life I have studied the black arts. It is strange to finally confront the Prince of Darkness himself.” In short, the idea seems to be that when Van Helsing looks at Dracula, he isn’t just seeing a monster to be destroyed; he sees a mirror image, almost a dark reflection of his own desires. But while Van Helsing fights to save people with his treatments and his knowledge, his own form of mortal power, Dracula uses his supernatural abilities to get what he wants and go where he pleases. This makes the battle feel more personal, while still owing to Stoker’s concept of the characters. In the book, Dracula and Van Helsing don’t really meet face to face very often, and neither have encountered one another before. Lom turns in a magnificent performance; very thoughtful and enigmatic, but with something of a tender side, which perfectly matches Lee’s own work as Dracula. Ironically, the two actors actually never met face to face behind the scenes; even in the one scene where they encounter each other, the two were filmed at separate times. Frankly, if I hadn’t found this out after the fact, I would never have guessed; their work is that splendid. It’s just another thing that made this rather underrated Dracula film so special.

4. Frank Finlay, from the 1977 film.
This is undoubtedly the most accurate-to-the-book Van Helsing of them all. Finlay was largely known for being a more comedic actor, playing such characters as Porthos in Richard Lester’s Three Musketeers trilogy, and Inspector Lestrade in two separate Sherlock Holmes movies, among other parts. As Van Helsing, that clownish side of him is brought to bear, as his heavy accent and slightly neurotic characterization makes for a deceptively amusing figure in the story. However, when he needs to get serious, he is deadly serious (no pun intended), and you never once question his wisdom, even if he is rather eccentric and a little silly. Much like in the book, he isn’t depicted as an experienced vampire hunter or some sort of obsessive zealot; he’s just a guy who knows that when he can’t explain something, the inexplicable must be responsible. As a result, he’s just as much an amateur as the rest of the guys in the story. It’s his understanding of vampire folklore that really makes him the authority in the group, as well as his more scientific side. A somewhat more comical take on the character, perhaps, but no less interesting for all that.

3. The Version from the 2006 BBC Radio Play.
No actor was credited with playing Van Helsing in this radio play, which is an enormous shame, because whoever did the work here was ASTONISHINGLY good. In a cast including such talents as Jon Glover as Renfield, David Suchet as the Count, and Tom Hiddleston (yes, Loki lovers, THAT Tom Hiddleston) as Jonathan Harker, Mr. Anonymous here really holds his own quite strongly. This is what would happen if you gave Frank Finlay’s Van Helsing a bit less of a comedic streak; once again, this is a take that’s closer to the book, but while Finlay seems to be grasping for straws and occasionally coming out on top - which is, admittedly, quite fun to watch and experience - this Van Helsing starts out on top and never drops. He’s authoritative, powerful, commanding, and confident; he’s easily a match for the devilish Dracula, who has all these same attributes. While Finlay’s Van Helsing is a bit of a Doctor-Who-esque figure - someone who is deceptively amusing and strange while able to also be stone-cold serious - this Van Helsing has little time for jokes. He may not be experienced as a monster hunter, but he takes the position quite seriously, and knows there is no time to get befuddled or bamboozled; the entire world is in danger! With that said, he does have a soft, even sort of sweet side to him, and acts almost like a mentor to some of the other characters in this audio drama. In short: I don’t know who played the good professor in this version, but I truly wish I did!

2. Edward Van Sloan, from the 1931 film.
In my opinion, what made the 1931 film version of Dracula work so well - beyond ANYTHING else, and that’s actually saying more than you might realize - it was the relationship between Bela Lugosi’s Dracula and Edward Van Sloan’s Abraham Van Helsing. (How oddly similar those names sound…) The film expanded on Dracula’s role in the story, and slightly retooled Van Helsing’s own role, as well. This was where the concept of the two as arch-foes really became the focus of the story; the way these two talk to and about each other feels different from any other version of these two characters. It reminds me very strongly of Sherlock Holmes and Professor Moriarty; Van Helsing’s cold, slightly eccentric genius pitted against Dracula’s experience and evil power. These two titanic egos just grappling for control. Nowhere is this more evident than one particularly powerful scene where Dracula tries to use hypnosis to ensnare Van Helsing. The professor nearly falls for it, taking a few steps towards the Count...but then gets ahold of himself, and backs away with a slight smirk. The actors are a big part of what makes this relationship work; Lugosi and Sloan both had played their respective roles against each other dozens of times onstage in a Broadway production of Dracula, which was actually the inspiration for the film. In the movie, the two were playing the same parts, but now had years of knowledge about one another, and more time to play off one another in the actual story. I’m honestly amazed that, because of this, Van Sloan remains less well-known when compared to Lugosi...especially considering Van Sloan’s career took off just as much as his onscreen rival’s, as he appeared in somewhat similar roles in both “Frankenstein” and “The Mummy,” among other appearances. In this role, he is wonderfully composed and just as compelling as Dwight Frye’s psychotic Renfield or even Lugosi’s sophisticated Count, and it is these three specific performances, above all else, that really help this black-and-white classic stand the test of time.

But as wonderful as the great Edward Van Sloan is...it’s no surprise who my choice for number one would be...

1. Peter Cushing, from the Hammer Horror series.
How could it not be Peter Cushing in this slot? When one thinks the name “Van Helsing,” his name is usually not far behind it, and vice-versa. Having played the role no less than five times throughout several pictures in Hammer Horror’s Dracula series, this was the original action-loving monster hunter. He was essentially Van Sloan on steroids, or a proto-Hugh Jackman. He could be dapper and reasonable and even very gentle, but once he was on the hunt, he was unstoppable and ready for a fight. The coldness with which he deals with Lucy when she is transformed, to say nothing of Dracula himself, is actually just as chilling as the vampires themselves can be, but he makes it clear that this is all in the name of the greater good. And even though he’s clearly obsessed, he doesn’t come off as a madman or even all that bizarre; the absolute confidence and unwavering discipline with which Peter Cushing delivers his lines and holds his posture makes him truly a powerhouse character. He’s resourceful and cunning, a perfect match for the rather beastly Dracula of these stories. He took the wisdom of Stoker’s character, the stalwart ego of Edward Van Sloan, and mixed it with his own vivacity and sense of elegance to create perhaps the ultimate vampire slayer. Move over, Buffy! When it comes to smiting the powers of evil, it’s no real secret why Peter Cushing takes the cake as My Favorite Portrayal of Professor Van Helsing.

Honorable Mentions Include…
David Suchet, from the 2006 film.
Released the same year as the BBC Radio Play, wherein Suchet played Dracula himself, this BBC T.V. movie featured the actor as the good professor instead. The most notable thing about this movie is that Van Helsing’s character is combined, curiously enough, with the character of Renfield, as Van Helsing is depicted as a vampire expert who has been driven half-insane after an encounter with Dracula, and is forced to leave his hermit-like life to take charge in the battle against the Count’s dark power. It’s a unique spin on things, to say the least.

Walter Ladengast, from Nosferatu the Vampyre.
This remake, produced in the late 1970s, of the classic film “Nosferatu,” features a very different Van Helsing from basically any other version. Instead of being a man wise enough to believe in superstition when nobody else will, Van Helsing is instead changed into a skeptic; a man of science who refuses to believe in the supernatural, and must learn to accept the impossible as real. I am not sure why the decision was made to turn the character so topsy-turvy in this manner, but if the BBC can combine Van Helsing with Renfield, I guess anything goes. It’s still a fun character, and a fun performance, and was certainly a welcome change from the original film, where the presumed Van Helsing character - Dr. Bulwer - was barely even present.