Dracula

The Undead

By: Dacre Stoker

Narrated by: Alex Dunbar

Length: 13 hrs and 18 mins

Publisher's summary

Here is the official sequel to Bram Stoker's classic novel Dracula, written by his direct descendent and endorsed by the Stoker family.

The story begins in 1912, 25 years after the events described in the original novel. Dr. Jack Seward, now a disgraced morphine addict, hunts vampires across Europe with the help of a mysterious benefactor.

Meanwhile, Quincey Harker, the grown son of Jonathan and Mina, leaves law school to pursue a career in stage at London's famous Lyceum Theatre.

The production of Dracula at the Lyceum, directed and produced by Bram Stoker, has recently lost its star. Luckily, Quincey knows how to contact the famed Hungarian actor Basarab, who agrees to take the lead role.

Quincey soon discovers that the play features his parents and their former friends as characters, and seems to reveal much about the terrible secrets he's always suspected them of harbouring. But, before he can confront them, Jonathan Harker is found murdered.

The writers were able to access Bram Stoker's hand-written notes and have included in their story characters and plot threads that had been excised by the publisher from the original printing over a century ago.

Dracula is one of the most recognized fictional characters in the world, having spawned dozens of multi-media spin-offs. The Un-Dead is the first Dracula story to enjoy the full support of the Stoker estate since the original 1931 movie starring Bela Lugosi.

©2009 HarperCollins Publishers (P)2009 HarperCollins Publishers

I hoestly tried to like the book...

... but I did not succeed. Some ideas where really good: Featuring Bram Stoker as a character in the sequel, or showing the shadow sides of all the brave and noblehearted characters of the original. But unfortunately some good ideas are not enough to make a good read:

1.) The authors did not succeed in satisfyingly explaining how Dracula "survived" his beheading and crumbeling into Dust at the End of the original.

2.) Where is all the subtle horror?! I don`t mind if a book is written to become a Hollywood Blockbuster, but if you can not actually help foreseeing the next clifhanger in the script alltogether with the computer animated effects, the THX surround sound and the smell of the Popcorn in every scene, that is way to much.

3.) The good idea of showing the dark sides of the characters of the original is exaggerated by far - I really can not imagine Mina from original "Dracula" and the Mina from "The Undead" beeing the same person (same thing with Van Helsing and Dracula himself).

4.) Why do all the people that are infected with Draculas blood do have to have superpowers (even if not undead yet).

5.) Last and worst of all: Was this "Dracula-loves-loves-Mina-with-all-of-his-(undead)-heart-crap" in the end really necessary. In my oppinion this turnes one of the most fascinating badguys into a whiny "twilight" hoax.

I hope there will be no sequel to the sequel.

A fan fiction, fun at times, ruined by vanity

This book's greatest sin is its pretense and vanity. A fan fiction sequel to Dracula has, of course, every right to exist, like many others. Dacre Stoker, however, mixing his discovery of his ancestry with his American audacity, managed somehow to convince the Stoker estate to make this "the official sequel". What a shame. One of the most influential books in human history needs no sequel. That much goes without saying. Sadly for Dacre, this ludicrous title is what makes the book weaker, more ridiculous, more irritating, more unnecessary than it surely would have been anyway.

Some of the premises are certainly intriguing. Dacre is humble enough to work with a co-author - an actual writer. Others have been already done much better. However, somewhere around the book's half even the good ones become tiresome and are ultimately wasted, and all the twists and turns are obvious a mile away. Another noteworthy sin for this "sequel" is a retconning of the original. Dacre obviously counts not on fans of his great ancestor, but rather on fans of the many Hollywood treatments of his work.

Alex Dunbar does a decent enough job reading the material, but his voice is too weak and too high pitched, so alas the book is not saved by the narration.

I can only recommend this book to Dracula completists (such as myself). Us, completists, will certainly give his "prequel" a go as well.