Dracula the Un-Dead

By: Dacre Stoker, Ian Holt

Narrated by: Simon Prebble

Length: 13 hrs and 37 mins

Publisher's summary

Dracula the Un-Dead is a bone-chilling sequel based on Bram Stoker's own handwritten notes for characters and plot threads excised from the original novel. Dracula the Un-Dead begins in 1912, 25 years after Dracula "crumbled into dust".

Van Helsing's protégé, Dr. Jack Seward, is now a disgraced morphine addict obsessed with stamping out evil across Europe. Meanwhile, an unknowing Quincey Harker, the grown son of Jonathan and Mina, leaves law school for the London stage, only to stumble upon the troubled production of Dracula directed and produced by Bram Stoker himself. The play plunges Quincey into the world of his parents' terrible secrets, but before he can confront them, he experiences evil in a way he had never imagined. One by one, the band of heroes that defeated Dracula a quarter-century ago is being hunted down. Could it be that Dracula somehow survived their attack and is seeking revenge? Or is their another force at work whose relentless purpose is to destroy anything and anyone associated with Dracula?

©2009 Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt (P)2009 Recorded Books, LLC

Critic reviews

"Energetically paced and packed with outrageously entertaining action, this supernatural thriller is a well-needed shot of fresh blood for the Dracula mythos." ( Publisher's Weekly)

Dracula Re-Imagined....

First, this is a very entertaining book with a flawless narration by Simon Prebble. I enjoyed it immensely. Less of a sequel and more of a "re-imagining," this novel is built on the premise that Bram Stoker, in his original book, distorted the truth about the ancient vampire's motives and purpose. Prince (not Count) Dracula, it turns out, has been grossly misunderstood. Successful in capturing the mood and tone of the original, "Dracula the Un-Dead" also brings back the first book's principal characters, rejoining their lives 25 years after the events of the previous book. Though the story suffers from a few disturbing inconsistencies and several plot twists and action scenes obviously designed for Hollywood, it is a commendable effort that should please most fans of the original Bram Stoker novel.

Amazing sequel to a horror Classic!!

I was enthralled with the entire story and could not stop listening to it until I finished it! This is a must read or rather listen to story.

A different take

I really like this as a “stand alone” story. If you are a Dracula fan this is a must listen

They need another book

What did you love best about Dracula the Un-Dead?

The story was plausible and continued beautifully.

What was one of the most memorable moments of Dracula the Un-Dead?

Quincy Harker's realization of the who Dracula was and his selfish judgement call on his mother, blew me away.

What does Simon Prebble bring to the story that you wouldn’t experience if you just read the book?

I was in the story with him. His telling of the story made it seem as if he and I were following the characters around and he was explaining to me what I was seeing.

Did you have an extreme reaction to this book? Did it make you laugh or cry?

I was over joyed.

Any additional comments?

I would love to there to be a part 3. Dracula and Mina should return. Quincy should arrive in America as a vampire hunter.

Thoroughly enjoyed this

As someone who is a huge fan of Bram Stoker’s Dracula & the ‘92 Coppola film, this was an excellent reimagined continuation of the story. I definitely would say this is more of a continuation of the film than the book but I would not have been disappointed either way. The idea of Dracula being a hopeless romantic and the “love never dies” is a wonderful take that has been done many times but this painted it very well. Also as someone who is interested in the life & story of Erzsébet Báthory I was thrilled of her involvement as well (I think there needs to be more Erzsébet Báthory books moving forward!). Definitely glad I don’t listen to majority of reviews that people leave, this is definitely one for you to make your own opinion on. Really loved it and the narration was good which always helps my enjoyment of an audio book.

Not a true sequel. Fan fiction at best

First and foremost... while the story uses all the same characters and settings while introducing a new 'big bad' to fear, Dacre spent good portions of his sequel outright saying (not insinuating) that the original Dracula story was a poorly written fiction put together by a failed writer / playwright. Dacre purports to have written this sequel based on Bram Stoker's notes, and identifies that the original release is not the WHOLE story as it was cut apart to make it palatable by readers of the time, but he changes so much of the mythos as to have been a completely different story barely if at all connected to the original by names only.

So, taken as a stand-alone book and not a sequel, the book still has numerous problems. He changes character motivations and attitudes from the beginning of his own book to the end with no real reason for the turn. The book feels more like Dacre wanted to change the original Dracula mythos to be in line with the current genre offerings with more sex, power, and animalistic lust. He leans hard on the crutch of blaming Bram Stoker for being a bad writer throughout, rather than just developing solid motivations for his newly minted versions of old characters. The plot twists can be seen coming from a mile away so the surprises are really just 'yah I know' moments. He uses 'blood memory' as a way to add an invisible narrator to provide back story and exposition. It feels like a cheap trick for telling important details he was too lazy to write in context.

Overall, formerly interesting characters are made flat and boring with the big turn for every single person essentially being 'PTSD made them do it' in all circumstances. His sequel is made more frustrating because if you read his prequel, Dracul, which was written after this book and takes place before Dracula, he changes the mythos AGAIN and doesn't bother to tie it to his own writings for a sequel.

The story itself is fun if it weren't for the weird character motivation changes randomly occurring and the attempt to make it fit the more modern young adult romance mentality associated with Vampires.

Potential for so much more.

I enjoyed this sequel/remained story if Prince Dracula. it has a lot going for it, but just didn't quite have the impact I was looking for. Perhaps is there is a third story... it will have less melodramatic dialog and internal monolog that is pointless and contradictory to common sense. Again, a lot of potential for the future of everyone's favorite Dark Prince.

Better than the review says

This is a good book. It’s not a masterpiece in anyway, but if your fan of stokers Dracula then I think you enjoy this book

Forget everything you know about Dracula

Personally for me this was a fun story, that was very fast paced, and VERY Hollywood in it's approach. For Bram Stoker purists this might be a turn off, because it's definitely not the poetic literature that the original novel is. It's flat out Hollywood horror movie type stuff, so for me I enjoyed it, but it might not work for a lot of people depending on what type of story you enjoy.

What a wasted opportunity

The performance was fine, nothing wrong with the presentation of this novel. The story was absurd, it was as if he took nothing from the original novel. Dracula is the greatest villain in all of fiction. And to make him the hero is ridiculous. Also the characters of Mina send Jonathan were cheapened by the stupid idea that she was nothing more than a cheating wife. Dacre Stoker had the opportunity, with Dracul, to link the stories together and form a comprehensive trilogy. This book is a bad B-movie idea at best. I’d love to give it no stars.