What do you think?
Rate this book
Bram Stoker's Dracula
A fifteenth century crusader finds immortality as a vampire in order to be reunited with his dead wife
190 pages, Hardcover
First published November 1, 1992
5 people are currently reading
272 people want to read
About the author
Fred Saberhagen
335 books492 followersFred Saberhagen was an American science fiction and fantasy author most famous for his ''Beserker'' and Dracula stories.
Saberhagen also wrote a series of a series of post-apocalyptic mytho-magical novels beginning with his popular ''Empire of the East'' and continuing through a long series of ''Swords'' and ''Lost Swords'' novels. Saberhagen died of cancer, in Albuquerque, New Mexico
Saberhagen was born in and grew up in the area of Chicago, Illinois. Saberhagen served in the [[U.S. Air Force]] during the Korean War while he was in his early twenties. Back in civilian life, Saberhagen worked as an It was while he was working for Motorola (after his military service) that Saberhagen started writing fiction seriously at the age of about 30. "Fortress Ship", his first "Berserker" short shory, was published in 1963. Then, in 1964, Saberhagen saw the publication of his first novel, ''The Golden People''.
From 1967 to 1973, he worked as an editor for the Chemistry articles in the ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' as well as writing its article on science fiction. He then quit and took up writing full-time. In 1975, he moved to Albuquerque, New Mexico.
He married fellow writer Joan Spicci in 1968. They had two sons and a daughter.
Saberhagen also wrote a series of a series of post-apocalyptic mytho-magical novels beginning with his popular ''Empire of the East'' and continuing through a long series of ''Swords'' and ''Lost Swords'' novels. Saberhagen died of cancer, in Albuquerque, New Mexico
Saberhagen was born in and grew up in the area of Chicago, Illinois. Saberhagen served in the [[U.S. Air Force]] during the Korean War while he was in his early twenties. Back in civilian life, Saberhagen worked as an It was while he was working for Motorola (after his military service) that Saberhagen started writing fiction seriously at the age of about 30. "Fortress Ship", his first "Berserker" short shory, was published in 1963. Then, in 1964, Saberhagen saw the publication of his first novel, ''The Golden People''.
From 1967 to 1973, he worked as an editor for the Chemistry articles in the ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' as well as writing its article on science fiction. He then quit and took up writing full-time. In 1975, he moved to Albuquerque, New Mexico.
He married fellow writer Joan Spicci in 1968. They had two sons and a daughter.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
May 15, 2011
I re-watched the movie recently and then re-read the book for the first time in years. Compared to the movie the book is actually quite good, but I still disagree with Coppola's words that this would be the most true version of Bram Stoker's novel. In fact, I can't see where in the novel he has gotten the characters and the interpretations from: the slutty Lucy, the Dracula full of feelings and sympathy and whatnot, the ridiculous vampire sex scenes and other forced and underlined eroticism. This is like a Harlequin version of Dracula. Yes, features like that have later been added to vampires in popular culture which has its roots in Bram Stoker's novel, and the novel gives tons of possibilities for diverse sexual interpretations, but drawing a straight line between the campy Lucy The Slut and the innocent, naïve Lucy of the novel is just... a sacrilege? I don't really mind the vampire image of the movie/book, but calling it Bram Stoker's vampire image makes me wonder if I've read the same book as Coppola has.
July 21, 2012
Oh, so very terrible. I HAD to read it for grad school, in which I was assigned a presentation on Dracula adaptations, which sounds fun, right? But that was the year Coppola's horrible movie came out. I wound up seeing that damn flick three times.
January 18, 2011
Based on the miistitled but splendidly sumptuous Bram Stoker´s Dracula (1992), this is fun, brisk reading. No, it does not belong among the worst books of all time.
February 2, 2025
Great book.
November 9, 2024
Ehhhh. It was ok. I enjoyed the tie to historical Prince Vlad.
I accidentally purchased this from a secondhand book store thinking it was the original Dracula and only realizing when I got home it had a different Author. Whoops.
I got through it, nothing especially profound until the afterword by Francis Ford Coppola; “Even if people today don’t feel a sacramental relationship with God, I think they can understand how many people renounce their blood ties to creation and become like the living dead. The vampire has lost his soul, and that can happen to anyone.” Seems especially timely today.
I accidentally purchased this from a secondhand book store thinking it was the original Dracula and only realizing when I got home it had a different Author. Whoops.
I got through it, nothing especially profound until the afterword by Francis Ford Coppola; “Even if people today don’t feel a sacramental relationship with God, I think they can understand how many people renounce their blood ties to creation and become like the living dead. The vampire has lost his soul, and that can happen to anyone.” Seems especially timely today.
November 27, 2024
I'm glad I listened to this on Audible. It was a chore to get through.
December 3, 2017
Bram Stoker's Dracula. Celebrating its twenty-fifth anniversary this year. I recall seeing it in theaters the day it opened in November of 1992. It's been an enormous influence on my own horror fiction.
What made James V. Hart's screenplay so innovative was that it was the most true to the source material ever written (which is saying something, given how many stage and screen adaptions there'd been in the century between the original novel and this movie), augmented with an historical prologue (based on the research of Raymond T. McNally and Radu Florescu) and a romantic subplot that, for my money, actually improves the story, imbuing it with a greater connective tissue and thematic resonance.
And what subsequently made the film Francis Ford Coppola directed from Hart's script so one-of-a-kind was his operatic take on the material, drawing from influences as varied as F. W. Murnau, Jean Cocteau, Gustav Klimt, and so on, to create something with an aesthetic sensibility like nothing before or since! In-camera effects, sumptuous costume and production design, stellar performances (Keanu Reeves notwithstanding), and Wojciech Kilar's haunting score all helped elevate an already terrific screenplay into a gorgeously phantasmagoric horror experience. It is one of the most original takes on the legendary character/fable known as Dracula.
So, absent all of the cinematic flourishes Coppola and his collaborators brought to the table, this novelization -- though well-written by Fred Saberhagen -- essentially amounts to a prose retelling of Bram Stoker's epistolary novel. In other words: There isn't much point to it. It's a novelization of a movie that itself is a faithful adaptation of a classic novel. You're probably better off reading Stoker, watching Coppola, and skipping this.
But... if you're a diehard fan of Dracula and/or this particular movie, the novelization does provide some nice supplemental detail (pulled from overlooked elements of the original novel) that help better explain certain character motivations and plot machinations. But logic was never really the point of Bram Stoker's Dracula, and what this novelization offers in clarifying insights it lacks in Coppola's hallucinatory sleight-of-hand. Sad to say, it's a second-rate retelling of the story, sans the distinct point of view of either Stoker or Coppola. Bram Stoker's Dracula is a great story that inspired a brilliant film, but this novelization doesn't really do either justice.
What made James V. Hart's screenplay so innovative was that it was the most true to the source material ever written (which is saying something, given how many stage and screen adaptions there'd been in the century between the original novel and this movie), augmented with an historical prologue (based on the research of Raymond T. McNally and Radu Florescu) and a romantic subplot that, for my money, actually improves the story, imbuing it with a greater connective tissue and thematic resonance.
And what subsequently made the film Francis Ford Coppola directed from Hart's script so one-of-a-kind was his operatic take on the material, drawing from influences as varied as F. W. Murnau, Jean Cocteau, Gustav Klimt, and so on, to create something with an aesthetic sensibility like nothing before or since! In-camera effects, sumptuous costume and production design, stellar performances (Keanu Reeves notwithstanding), and Wojciech Kilar's haunting score all helped elevate an already terrific screenplay into a gorgeously phantasmagoric horror experience. It is one of the most original takes on the legendary character/fable known as Dracula.
So, absent all of the cinematic flourishes Coppola and his collaborators brought to the table, this novelization -- though well-written by Fred Saberhagen -- essentially amounts to a prose retelling of Bram Stoker's epistolary novel. In other words: There isn't much point to it. It's a novelization of a movie that itself is a faithful adaptation of a classic novel. You're probably better off reading Stoker, watching Coppola, and skipping this.
But... if you're a diehard fan of Dracula and/or this particular movie, the novelization does provide some nice supplemental detail (pulled from overlooked elements of the original novel) that help better explain certain character motivations and plot machinations. But logic was never really the point of Bram Stoker's Dracula, and what this novelization offers in clarifying insights it lacks in Coppola's hallucinatory sleight-of-hand. Sad to say, it's a second-rate retelling of the story, sans the distinct point of view of either Stoker or Coppola. Bram Stoker's Dracula is a great story that inspired a brilliant film, but this novelization doesn't really do either justice.
January 4, 2024
For starters lets properly identify this particular novel as its title is misleading. This is NOT Bram Stoker's classic 1987 novel Dracula which we all know, this is a novelization of the 1992 film directed by Francis Ford Coppola. Meaning it's an adaptation of the movie screenplay in the form of a novel.
Having said that, it's pretty good, giving us not just the story we saw on screen but scenes with additional dialogue and even some scenes not in the movie which flesh out the story quite a bit.
The book (and movie) are very sympathetic toward Dracula, painting him as a tragic figure who fell from grace and embraced evil. The main plot follows the book fairly faithfully, Jonathan Harker, a real estate agent, travels to Transylvania to meet with The Count who wants to buy property and settle in London to further expand his vampiric influence. Where the story deviates is that while in London he meets Mina, Harker's fiancée who greatly resembles Dracula's lost love.
As a fan of novelizations, this was a very good read for me and as an aside I'll mention that the author Fred Saberhagen had written about Dracula before in his trilogy The Dracula Tape, The Holmes-Dracula File and An Old Friend of the Family, all very worthy reads.
Having said that, it's pretty good, giving us not just the story we saw on screen but scenes with additional dialogue and even some scenes not in the movie which flesh out the story quite a bit.
The book (and movie) are very sympathetic toward Dracula, painting him as a tragic figure who fell from grace and embraced evil. The main plot follows the book fairly faithfully, Jonathan Harker, a real estate agent, travels to Transylvania to meet with The Count who wants to buy property and settle in London to further expand his vampiric influence. Where the story deviates is that while in London he meets Mina, Harker's fiancée who greatly resembles Dracula's lost love.
As a fan of novelizations, this was a very good read for me and as an aside I'll mention that the author Fred Saberhagen had written about Dracula before in his trilogy The Dracula Tape, The Holmes-Dracula File and An Old Friend of the Family, all very worthy reads.
August 26, 2024
This is an oddity of a book; a novelisation of a film that claimed to be a faithful adaptation of a novel.
Fred Saberhagen is, of course, no stranger to Dracula, having written a whole series about the further adventures of the Count. However, he seems uneasy with this book, working as he is with Francis Ford Coppola’s “unique” vision of Stoker’s monster.
He does his best to work with the romantic subplot that Coppola clumsily shoehorned into the story, but one can sense his distaste. The bits without Mina and Vlad mooning over each other roll along with a vigour completely lacking from the lovey-dovey nonsense, and it feels very much as if Saberhagen enjoyed writing them more. His characterisations serve the cast better than the film does, in particular Jonathan Harker, who here has more backbone.
If you’re a fan of the movie, it’s a fun read. It gets four stars because Saberhagen is always a page-turner, but for fans of Stoker’s vampire, it’s a mild curiosity at best, a terrible disappointment at worst.
Fred Saberhagen is, of course, no stranger to Dracula, having written a whole series about the further adventures of the Count. However, he seems uneasy with this book, working as he is with Francis Ford Coppola’s “unique” vision of Stoker’s monster.
He does his best to work with the romantic subplot that Coppola clumsily shoehorned into the story, but one can sense his distaste. The bits without Mina and Vlad mooning over each other roll along with a vigour completely lacking from the lovey-dovey nonsense, and it feels very much as if Saberhagen enjoyed writing them more. His characterisations serve the cast better than the film does, in particular Jonathan Harker, who here has more backbone.
If you’re a fan of the movie, it’s a fun read. It gets four stars because Saberhagen is always a page-turner, but for fans of Stoker’s vampire, it’s a mild curiosity at best, a terrible disappointment at worst.
August 7, 2014
The story is follows Prince Vladislaus Draculea from a Wallachian warlord prince to a vampire.
A solicitor goes to meet his client and becomes his prisoner. The Nosferatu goes to Victorian in search of his wife, Princess Elisabeta now reincarnated as Wilhelmina Murray. Vlad's nemesis is
Professor Abraham Van Helsing. The vampire hunter destroy coffins filled with soil of Romania and drive the prince of darkness back to his home land with help of Mina. Vlad is destroyed outside his
castle by the hunters.
A solicitor goes to meet his client and becomes his prisoner. The Nosferatu goes to Victorian in search of his wife, Princess Elisabeta now reincarnated as Wilhelmina Murray. Vlad's nemesis is
Professor Abraham Van Helsing. The vampire hunter destroy coffins filled with soil of Romania and drive the prince of darkness back to his home land with help of Mina. Vlad is destroyed outside his
castle by the hunters.
April 11, 2009
Based on the movie, which I haven't seen all the way through. I really enjoyed the book...the historical glimpse into Dracula's beginnings and the storyline of him searching for his true love lost.
Wanted to read the original, but this is the one that we have. Fun read.
Wanted to read the original, but this is the one that we have. Fun read.
Currently reading
January 21, 2011Slow, but very good. It's a shame that everyone knows the basic idea of what vampires are. The book was written way before everyone knew the stories, and is therefore hard to hold the suspense. The style is excellent though.
July 28, 2011
Honestly haven't read it. A novel of a movie based on a novel? The movie itself was a departure from the original Stoker novel (despite its title) and Keanu Reeves still has the award for Worst English Accent Ever.
June 22, 2020
Carino e ricco di dettagli in certi punti, decisamente meno in altri. Mi aspettavo seguisse fedelmente la sceneggiatura del film, alcune parti risultano essere fedeli più al romanzo originale che alla trasposizione cinematografica.
March 16, 2017
Well... You know, it's pretty much the same than the movie so I don't think it deserves much credit as it is. Though I don't know the back story of writing this book so can't comment much.
February 16, 2011
human struggle of a 'count dracule'
March 5, 2017
Based on the movie, which I have to admit I've never seen. I really enjoyed the book though. It was a glimpse into Dracula's beginnings and his search for his lost true love.
October 4, 2014
Fun, light reading based on visually gorgeous and entertaining Stoker travesty.
April 9, 2015
Amazing scenery and costumes get no descriptions! It is still whole lot of fun. Stoker is pinning in his grave, though.
January 30, 2015
It was okay in my opinion. Its short which is good but i have read better romance and Gothic novels.
May 6, 2015
the beginning in dracula's castle was frightening to me, like really i was all like let's leave this place. the rest of the book was kinda meh though til the end
May 8, 2018
Pretty cool take on the movie that is about the original novel with some changes in it. I love movie tie ins and this one was pretty awesome.
June 11, 2018
A classic. Villain well developed, twist, was hooked from the beginning, horror story character driven, wonderful.
April 13, 2019
I have no idea how to rate this. While I enjoyed the ride, I mean, I cound've just watch the movie or read the original book 🤣
June 4, 2019
It was better than the movie.
May 25, 2021
Audiobook
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews