Scan barcode
dantalion_xi's review against another edition
4.0
Just like many other Dracula-fans, I really wanted to like this book.
And...somehow, I did it.
I was higly confident that it would not be THE sequel I wanted.
But I thought it could surprise me, and it did, somehow.
There's a long theory about Dracula being not that evil, the peak of which I found in an essay written by Alessandro Baricco at the end of an italian tranlsation of the book - yet, this theory being 'confirmed' and re-written by a direct descendant of Stoker somewhat thrilled me.
Of course, a 4 star rating instead of 5 has some reasons behind.
There are many things Dacre and Ian could have done better.
We have:
-too many character
-too intrigued plot
-an un-necessary obsession with making it real, which gave the opposite effect.
I could bear Bram Stoker being one of the characters thanks to Seward's revelations, but Jack the Ripper was really excessive.
Dacre should have focused less on research and more on narration and on the background-feeling the story had to have.
Too many elements are barely mentioned, just to disappear on the next page.
The best ideas he got writing the book were basically:
1)making Dracula a violent but good Crusader, whose purpose in the ''first'' novel was to defeat another, truly evil enemy - though Dacre hasn't been able to melt agreably this concept with the 'prince of darkness'' one
2)having Quincey (whom Harker himself hoped to bear some of Morris' heroic spirit)as new, dynamic main character
3)making us dream of a different conception, a different ending...
But sadly, though I personally enjoyed the book, I understand this is all it has to offer.
Dacre and Ian should have written two or three books, giving the story more time, more pages; as it is, it includes a great bunch of ideas which have been too much compressed - and this is particularly evident where Dracula himself appears as a character.
They could have written the sequel we may have felt as official...but they haven't been able. (At this point, Jeanne Kalogridis represents a better alternative)
I hope you may enjoy it, though, as a stand alone novel, and I recommend it anyway to Dracula's fans.
And...somehow, I did it.
I was higly confident that it would not be THE sequel I wanted.
But I thought it could surprise me, and it did, somehow.
There's a long theory about Dracula being not that evil, the peak of which I found in an essay written by Alessandro Baricco at the end of an italian tranlsation of the book - yet, this theory being 'confirmed' and re-written by a direct descendant of Stoker somewhat thrilled me.
Of course, a 4 star rating instead of 5 has some reasons behind.
There are many things Dacre and Ian could have done better.
We have:
-too many character
-too intrigued plot
-an un-necessary obsession with making it real, which gave the opposite effect.
I could bear Bram Stoker being one of the characters thanks to Seward's revelations, but Jack the Ripper was really excessive.
Dacre should have focused less on research and more on narration and on the background-feeling the story had to have.
Too many elements are barely mentioned, just to disappear on the next page.
The best ideas he got writing the book were basically:
1)making Dracula a violent but good Crusader, whose purpose in the ''first'' novel was to defeat another, truly evil enemy - though Dacre hasn't been able to melt agreably this concept with the 'prince of darkness'' one
2)having Quincey (whom Harker himself hoped to bear some of Morris' heroic spirit)as new, dynamic main character
3)making us dream of a different conception, a different ending...
But sadly, though I personally enjoyed the book, I understand this is all it has to offer.
Dacre and Ian should have written two or three books, giving the story more time, more pages; as it is, it includes a great bunch of ideas which have been too much compressed - and this is particularly evident where Dracula himself appears as a character.
They could have written the sequel we may have felt as official...but they haven't been able. (At this point, Jeanne Kalogridis represents a better alternative)
I hope you may enjoy it, though, as a stand alone novel, and I recommend it anyway to Dracula's fans.
maniikoi's review against another edition
5.0
This was just brilliant. An epic mastery of story telling - a great success of a sequel to the original classic of 'Dracula.'
shanhautman's review against another edition
1.0
so freakin' excited to read this! too bad it sucked, literally and figuratively.
farawayinwonderland's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
3.0
mrsbear's review against another edition
5.0
Excellent book! I love the developement of our old friends and the way Dracula was portrayed! I have always loved Dracula and thought there was more to him then the evil that meets the eye! Ending definately left it open for some more!
chloestanton2112's review against another edition
2.0
This book, oddly enough, follows the same plot as the musical LOVE NEVER DIES (the sequel to PHANTOM OF THE OPERA). The book follows Mina and Jonathon's son Quincey in his law studies in Paris, and reveals his passion for drama- this creates animosity between him and his father. Jonathon is shown as both a bad husband and father. Dr Seward has not given up on vampires, and has left England to France on the trail of Elizabeth Bathory. The English police become suspicious of Van Helsing, and the officer who let Jack the Ripper get away suspects the Professor of being the murderer. Throughout the novel the friendship between the original group is tested, and hardships are frequent.
SPOILERS FROM THIS POINT ONWARDS
I definitely enjoyed Elizabeth Bathory in this novel, with her being a powerful female LGBT villain that I have not previously read before. I would like to read a book from Bathory's perspective as the villainous vampire who ultimately succeeds in her mission- I didn't have any issues with the presentation of her character. Despite this, the progression of the characters from the original novel is somewhat disturbing, as they have all morphed into the complete opposite of their DRACULA characters. This was explained as showing the impact Dracula had on them, which does sound probable but could have revitalised the original novel to a much higher extent if the characters were better presented.
Mina's relationship with Dracula, and his consequent resurrection, felt very strange. The readers were meant to despise Dracula in the original novel, but then root for his success and sympathise with him in the sequel. I still have slight confusion over Basarab and Dracula's connection- I think they are the same person, but I cannot say for sure despite having read the book multiple times. I think the authors could have used Mina and Dracula's relationship in a much better way. Quincey throughout the book has a poor relationship with Jonathon and has moments where he is presented similarly to Dracula- the authors could have written Quincey as Dracula's son to create a much more dramatic and insightful book, but they did not.
The book mentions how the author wrote DRACULA THE UN-DEAD with the intention of keeping the Stoker copyright on the characters in-tact as it had almost run out, and this unfortunately does show in the novel.
The ending was not satisfactory to me, and I feel like it could have been written better- Bathory was set out to be the most powerful vampire that even defeated Dracula, and this could have been capitalised on in the ending. The swift change from the characters' disgust of vampirism in DRACULA to becoming vampires in this novel is definitely an interesting interpretation, but it is not developed well enough to be a logical progression for the characters.
Overall, I did enjoy reading DRACULA THE UN-DEAD, however I have rated the book 2/5 stars as it has many flaws from a critical perspective.
SPOILERS FROM THIS POINT ONWARDS
I definitely enjoyed Elizabeth Bathory in this novel, with her being a powerful female LGBT villain that I have not previously read before. I would like to read a book from Bathory's perspective as the villainous vampire who ultimately succeeds in her mission- I didn't have any issues with the presentation of her character. Despite this, the progression of the characters from the original novel is somewhat disturbing, as they have all morphed into the complete opposite of their DRACULA characters. This was explained as showing the impact Dracula had on them, which does sound probable but could have revitalised the original novel to a much higher extent if the characters were better presented.
Mina's relationship with Dracula, and his consequent resurrection, felt very strange. The readers were meant to despise Dracula in the original novel, but then root for his success and sympathise with him in the sequel. I still have slight confusion over Basarab and Dracula's connection- I think they are the same person, but I cannot say for sure despite having read the book multiple times. I think the authors could have used Mina and Dracula's relationship in a much better way. Quincey throughout the book has a poor relationship with Jonathon and has moments where he is presented similarly to Dracula- the authors could have written Quincey as Dracula's son to create a much more dramatic and insightful book, but they did not.
The book mentions how the author wrote DRACULA THE UN-DEAD with the intention of keeping the Stoker copyright on the characters in-tact as it had almost run out, and this unfortunately does show in the novel.
The ending was not satisfactory to me, and I feel like it could have been written better- Bathory was set out to be the most powerful vampire that even defeated Dracula, and this could have been capitalised on in the ending. The swift change from the characters' disgust of vampirism in DRACULA to becoming vampires in this novel is definitely an interesting interpretation, but it is not developed well enough to be a logical progression for the characters.
Overall, I did enjoy reading DRACULA THE UN-DEAD, however I have rated the book 2/5 stars as it has many flaws from a critical perspective.
bex_702's review against another edition
2.0
Imaginative, but as a Dracula purist, it was difficult to finish.
thebooklovingpanda's review against another edition
1.0
I was so confused after reading this book. Actually, I didn't even really read it properly - I mostly skimmed to find out what the heck was going on and how the story would end. I was so confused as to why there was so much weird sex going on and how anything in the original Dracula could have led to what happened in this book.
Maybe if they'd just labelled it as a 're-imagining' rather than a sequel to Dracula it would have been better. Or even if they'd just created a whole new vampire! The characters in this book were so far gone from who they were in the original that it's already a different story altogether.
nikshelby's review against another edition
3.0
Written by Bram’s grandnephew, this book was a interesting sequel. I hated some parts. I hated their interpretation of how the heroes of “Dracula” would have responded to their previous adventures – particularly Van Helsing. I’m undecided on their reinterpretation of Dracula himself…I’m still thinking about it.
The main redeeming element? The introduction of Elizabeth Bathory. The success of Bathory worked for me; not only because she was an excellent villain, but because (like Dracula) there is a real historical Elizabeth Bathory – a famous serial killer who bathed in blood to keep her youth.
I also enjoyed the tie-in with the Jack-the-Ripper mystery, the appearance of Bram Stoker himself, and future potential of the story-migration to America.
The main redeeming element? The introduction of Elizabeth Bathory. The success of Bathory worked for me; not only because she was an excellent villain, but because (like Dracula) there is a real historical Elizabeth Bathory – a famous serial killer who bathed in blood to keep her youth.
I also enjoyed the tie-in with the Jack-the-Ripper mystery, the appearance of Bram Stoker himself, and future potential of the story-migration to America.
sarahanne8382's review against another edition
2.0
Having recently re-read the original Dracula, my memories of this one are more tarnished. I forgot what a master Bram Stoker was, making this mediocre work all the more disappointing. I'm keeping it at two stars because, while it's trash, it's trash I keep thinking about, so it's sort of like those cult classic B-movies that are really bad, but there's still something enjoyable watching how bad they are.