Mike Musto's Reviews > Dracula the Un-Dead

Dracula the Un-Dead by Dacre Stoker
Rate this book
Clear rating

M 50x66
's review
Jul 21, 2010

did not like it
Read in July, 2010

Billed as the "only true sequel" to the original Bram Stoker novel, it is so filled with changes from the original that it doesn't even deserve to be called a sequel. In the Authors' Notes in the back of the book the writers Use the excuse that present day vampire movie enthusiasts would not accept some of the original legend that was changed for the screen and so, rather than write directed at those who read books they decided to change the entire story in order to satisfy movie goers who, well, don't read! (Does that make sense to anyone out there?)
If in fact you have read the original Bram Stoker's "Dracula" I strongly recommend that you not waste your time with this distortion of a powerful book. If you have not read the original, read IT and skip this. Beyond being able to warn others away from it, I found NO redeeming value in Dracula the Un-Dead. But, if you want to have an idea of why I say this, Here are some tidbits:
- Vampires cannot walk in daylight but will "burn to ash if struck by the light of the sun"
- Mina and Dracula actually had a romantic AND sexual affair which Mina originally kept from the other heros
- Vampires cannot fly or change their form (it's all done with mind tricks)
- Jonathan's first sexual encounter was not in the marriage bed with Mina but with the 3 vampires in Dracula's castle
- Are you ready for this one: Count Dracula was actually misunderstood in the first book - he was in fact a hero fighting for GOD!!!!
These are only a few of the problems with this book.
1 like · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Dracula the Un-Dead.
Sign In »

No comments have been added yet.