Dracula: The Un-Dead
and she was right. I like a good vampire story, and this one - written by Dacre Stoker, the great grand-nephew of Brahm Stoker seemed promising.
I should have given up after the first 60 pages, but instead I marched doggedly through the entire 389 pages of this dreck. It was aweful. And I'm surprised. Really surprised.
It seems as if Dacre Stoker (and his co-conspirator in this grave robbing, Ian Holt) don't have any respect for the novel that inspired this sequel. Set 25 years after the original, all the surviving characters are misanthropic and unsympathetic. Johnathan Harker is a drunkard who hates Mina and frequents prostitutes, Mina Harker has become a semi-vampiric nymphomanic. Johnathan and Mina have a 24 year old son, Quincy, who spends the entire novel whining, "ehhhh, my daddy is too hard on me...." Arthur Holmwood is a self loathing recluse, Dr. Seward is a morphine addicted lunatic. Van Helsing - oh man! his character is completely inverted. All the good and noble (though crazy) aspects of Van Helsing are tossed out the window and all that's left is a narcissistic and foolish old man. And when Dracula,the "dark prince" (as he is constantly called) finally shows up he's an emasculated weakling not the the immortal monster of Bram's novel. It's as if Stoker and Holt set out to disgrace Stoker's characters. And even more - it's as if they wanted to disgrace Bram Stoker himself, who plays a role in the novel.
The plotting is clumsy - with numerous side plots and diversions. The inclusion of a Jack the Ripper connection was poorly executed and ultimately confusing. The action sequences are contrived and implausible. The characters are, as i said, unsympathetic and their motivations are contrived and unrealistic.
And the writing is poor. POOR. OH MY GOODNESS PAINFULLY POOR. In places it was like reading an essay written by a jr. high schooler.
Save yourself the time. Keep your love for Dracula. Don't read this one.
No comments:
Post a Comment