Renfield's Biggest Problem Is That It Doesn't Let Nicholas Hoult Be Weird Enough
The year is 2021: projects delayed by the pandemic are finally moving forward and the phrase "The Movies are Back!" has lost all meaning. But you're willing to let that go because news has just dropped that Nicolas Cage and Nicholas Hoult are set to co-star in a violent comedy as Dracula and his bug-eating assistant, Renfield. At long last, The Movies will actually be Back because that's exactly the kind of unhinged, perfect casting that will save the industry!
Except that year is now 2023, "Renfield" is tanking in theaters, and more importantly, the movie isn't even half as fun as we thought it would be.
On paper, "Renfield" has all the makings of a good time: Cage's Dracula is a scene-stealing weirdo, Hoult is anchoring the movie with as much pathos as one can muster for a bug-eating multi-century murderer, and the action is campy as hell with gore frequently splattered across our screens. So where exactly did it all go wrong?
It might have something to do with the fact that — despite the promise made by the premise — this movie only spends so much time on the relationship between Renfield and Dracula. The other half of the runtime is dedicated to an extremely thin and utterly uncompelling plotline about Awkwafina's Rebecca Quincy, a cop whose father was murdered by the mob. What does New Orleans mobster crime have to do with the story of Dracula and his souring relationship with Renfield? I've seen the movie and I'm still not sure.
But wasting time that could be dedicated to the vampiric odd couple isn't even the biggest blunder that the film makes. The real fatal flaw of "Renfield" is that it squanders the talents of proven onscreen maniac, Nicholas Hoult.
The role he was born to play
Much fanfare has been made about the fact that "Nicolas Cage as Dracula" is one of the greatest ideas ever. Because, y'know, obviously. But there hasn't been enough hype about the genius behind casting Nicholas Hoult as Renfield. A mere glance at Hoult's resume will confirm why he's perfect for the role: crazed chrome-mouthed Nux in "Mad Max: Fury Road"? The menacing yet oafish emperor of "The Great"? The scheming, powdered-wig-wearing aristocrat of "The Favourite?" Hoult is incredible at being a maniacal little weirdo, which is exactly the personality that Bram Stoker's R.M. Renfield is known for.
The deranged, fanatically devoted servant presented in "Dracula" is literally locked up in an insane asylum for the bulk of the novel. Under the thrall of the Count, he's absolutely unhinged, casually feeding on flies, spiders, and birds. It creeps out everyone in his vicinity, as does his fascination with blood and weird ramblings about his master. His gleeful, unsettling energy is the kind of energy that I can easily picture Hoult pulling off. Unfortunately, my imagination is all I have: in "Renfield," that character is essentially scrapped for something more subdued.
Of course, I don't expect this twist on the vampire classic to follow every aspect of "Dracula" to the letter — the fact that it pokes fun at the lore is half the fun. But the movie does want us to believe that this version of Renfield existed once, a long time ago. We just never get to see it for ourselves. We're told that Renfield was once fully under Dracula's thrall, and committed heinous acts for his master without thinking twice. But by the time we meet him, centuries have passed and he's reluctantly treading on in Dracula's employ until an act of heroism inspires him to change.
Let Nicholas Hoult be weird, dammit!
If hiding Renfield's reprehensible side is an effort to keep him likable then all I can do is shake my head in disappointment. If anyone can pull off going from an absolute monster to a sympathetic character in 90 minutes, it's Nicholas freaking Hoult. He's been nailing it for the past 20 episodes of "The Great," where the erratic psycho Emperor Peter III has slowly become a charming (if occasionally punchable) presence. We went from rooting for his murder to dreading his inevitably dark fate. The grand scheme to make us care for him has gone ridiculously well because Hoult always has us in the palm of his hands.
Hoult uses his face like a pro: playing up his boyish charms whilst pulling off heinous or disturbing acts. When he needs to, he hams it the hell up (huzzah!), whether that be abrupt murder in "The Great," or going totally apes**t in "Fury Road." In both cases, those are characters we end up rooting for with teary eyes.
Where is any of that in "Renfield," a movie that seems like the perfect place for Hoult's particular skillset? The movie is hilarious when Ben Schwartz goes wild as the buffoonish heir to a mob empire, and impeccable when Cage is snarling through razor-sharp teeth as the sauntering, uber-entertaining Drcaula. So how is there no space for Renfield to shine too? Isn't this movie named after him?!
Only occasionally does Renfield let loose, in too brief glimmers — like swallowing an entire ant farm to attack enemies with severed arms, still actively gushing blood. That particular scene comes late in the film, a quick glance at the lunatic that could've been. Hoult knows how to swing for the fences, and it's a shame that "Renfield" doesn't grant him the chance to prove it.