The first teaser is out and I think it looks terrific. A decent blend of traditional elements with some novel twists. A major pus is that it looks genuinely creepy.
I enjoyed it a lot, mostly. Obviously I would rather they'd stuck with the Victorian period, but I kind of knew in my heart (roughly at the point when I realised that all of Ep 2 was going to be set on the Demeter) that they must have something else up their sleeve, and wouldn't be able to resist going down the Dracula AD 2019 route. As with most of the Moffat/Gatiss collaborations, you feel that a bit more restraint would really deliver gold, but they just can't seem to help themselves. Still, it would have been foolish to expect a faithful adaptation from this pair. Instead, we got a Moffat/Gatiss remix, and I'm mostly OK with that. It will make a fascinating and mostly entertaining addition to the Dracula canon, and I'm sure I'll enjoy re-watching it all on Blu-ray. And Bang is certainly one of the the best screen Draculas.
There are so many things wrong with that last episode...who nailed down his coffin before it sank to the seabed, why did he not age back to his "old" self in the coffin after 100 + years, why did the soil not just disappear with the currents flowing through the gaps in it, could Lucy not restore her "beauty" (deluded) by drinking a few litres of blood etc etc ?
@Mind that bloody Gappy Agreed. If you were to make a list of all the nonsensical points in the story it would be as long as all a person's blood vessels stretched out in a line.
Perhaps it would have been more interesting to have Dracula come ashore in the (possibly not too distant) future when humans, through nanomedicine, microsurgery and diverse technological advances have actually become immortal as well.
I thought episode three started strongly but deteriorated to the point that it felt like a completely different series. Lucy was such a dull, dull character to take up so much focus and there were way too many unwise narrative choices, including the ending. I'd rate the three episodes as Excellent, Excellent, Poor. Hammer did way better with their modern Draculas than they did here.
Right, I watched all of it last night and I have to say I was really disappointed...the second episode was better than the first but the third was just awful.
I've managed to avoid reading any other reviews of episode 2 yet. Here are my impressions;
A strong continuation of the story, production values to the max, slightly fewer silly jokes (though still too many annoying anachronistic lines like 'reality is overrated') and somewhat more tension than part one thanks to The Thing meets Horror Express set up. The twist ending was unexpected, though let's hope we're not getting into 'Torchwood' territory.
And I was half expecting the mystery inhabitant Inside Number 9 to be Steve Pemberton ;-).
The humour seemed dialed-back a bit in Blood Vessel but I don't really have a problem with it. I think letting the audience laugh along with you for a moment before getting back to the scary stuff stops them laughing at you. I'm one of those people who thinks that the toll collector in Hammer's Dracula really helps with the pacing and managing the suspense - that little drop in tension lets you ramp it up even higher afterwards.
As Darrell's post suggests, there's lots to dive into in episode 2. The borrowing from Horror Express is a lot clearer now that we're trapped on a vehicle with a monster.
I'd love to see further series of Dracula but the overnight audience figures have been disappointing so far. I'm hoping that it will pick up considerably when the consolidated figures come in as people start to binge on recordings and catch up on iPlayer.
Obviously I still haven't seen any of it yet but the points CMM makes about the script and The Gatiss´s seeming need to add humour, in jokes etc. and not just play it "straight" is what often irritates me about his work...even though these things are put there for people such as myself...oh, and you lot! :)
Still no major spoilers from me - but wasn't it nice to see The Amicus Hand doing a cameo?! (with all the CGI tech that 2020 can offer, the choice to have the hand lolloping along at snail's pace was surely an attempt to party like its ~~AND NOW THE SCREAMING STARTS!)
Add to this references to THE TOMB OF LIGEIA, THE DEVIL RIDES OUT, RASPUTIN THE MAD MONK, ZOMBIE FLESH EATERS, and more (one I won't mention, in relation to the ending...) and it was a treat for buffs. Story-wise, well up to standard - loved spending so much time aboard the Demeter this evening.
When in the prologue we hear Mina writing that Jonathan should avail himself of all the women who cross his path, while she'll do the same with her admirers, the butcher's boy and the pub barmaid ('for a little variety') I feared the worst. When the prologue ends with the nun asking Jonathan " Mr Harker, I need to know. Did you have sexual intercourse with Count Dracula?" it seemed to confirm the worst in the sense that the writers would fill the 90 minutes with such attempts to render their work 'audacious'. Luckily once they'd got that out of their system they settled down to the task in hand and overall did a good job in making the Count a figure to be feared once more. I liked that, and the fact of having a strong antagonist, the atmosphere, locations, sets, lighting ... Unfortunately, the juvenile quips come thicker and faster as the show goes on, diluting the atmosphere generated previously. I wish Mr Gatiss would refrain from this kind of thing, but ever since Sherlock it's kind of been his trade mark. :-(
But overall I enjoyed the first episode - atmospheric and creepy and gory. The castle was a character in itself. Nice to see a gutsy Van Helsing and some consideration given to 'theology'. Dracula is at last returned to being a scary bastard, though the Cockernee Geezer quips and oneliners are SO annoying. Perhaps Mr Gatiss feels uncomfortable doing 'straight' horror/drama without his tried and tested humour dotted throughout, but I really find the jokes distracting, as well as some anachronistically 21st century, standard TV idioms "I need you to...", "Why would I do that?" Some wit and irony doesn't go amiss, but during the slaughter of the nuns Dracula comes over like Sean Pertwee in Dog Soldiers. A shame, because the confrontation at the gates was quite compelling (despite it being plainly obvious that Harker would shortly invite the Count inside) and the overall look and feel of the production is spot on. When not quipping, Dracula is the menacing and evil supernatural creature I'd been waiting to see again. Also fun to spot the in-jokes - the number of hammers lying around, the line 'I have a detective friend in London', etc
I loved it. Lots of stuff straight out of Stoker, lots of preposterously entertaining nonsense that could have come from 70s Hammer if they had bigger budgets. I really appreciate that it is out-and-out nasty with a Count who is very much not a romantic hero.
Rather impressive so far. Can't say too much in case of spoilers (though you all saw it, didn't you?). Some have taken against the humour, but it's working for me. That scene in the catacombs is deservedly getting lots of attention. The 'Sherlock' 90 minute format looks as though it will allow for development and breathing space for some familiar story elements - it'll be good to spend a fair bit of time on the Demeter tonight.
The nail bit was the nasty part, looks a bit busy. Not sure about the nun stake corps. Stil the production values look good, so style should be fine, no lets see what they do with the story.
I enjoyed it a lot, mostly. Obviously I would rather they'd stuck with the Victorian period, but I kind of knew in my heart (roughly at the point when I realised that all of Ep 2 was going to be set on the Demeter) that they must have something else up their sleeve, and wouldn't be able to resist going down the Dracula AD 2019 route. As with most of the Moffat/Gatiss collaborations, you feel that a bit more restraint would really deliver gold, but they just can't seem to help themselves. Still, it would have been foolish to expect a faithful adaptation from this pair. Instead, we got a Moffat/Gatiss remix, and I'm mostly OK with that. It will make a fascinating and mostly entertaining addition to the Dracula canon, and I'm sure I'll enjoy re-watching it all on Blu-ray. And Bang is certainly one of the the best screen Draculas.
Yes, Hammer dispatched the Count in some daft ways but nothing as lame as shaming him into committing suicide.
I thought episode three started strongly but deteriorated to the point that it felt like a completely different series. Lucy was such a dull, dull character to take up so much focus and there were way too many unwise narrative choices, including the ending. I'd rate the three episodes as Excellent, Excellent, Poor. Hammer did way better with their modern Draculas than they did here.
Right, I watched all of it last night and I have to say I was really disappointed...the second episode was better than the first but the third was just awful.
I've managed to avoid reading any other reviews of episode 2 yet. Here are my impressions;
A strong continuation of the story, production values to the max, slightly fewer silly jokes (though still too many annoying anachronistic lines like 'reality is overrated') and somewhat more tension than part one thanks to The Thing meets Horror Express set up. The twist ending was unexpected, though let's hope we're not getting into 'Torchwood' territory.
And I was half expecting the mystery inhabitant Inside Number 9 to be Steve Pemberton ;-).
Podcast supporting the series: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07z63xz]
The humour seemed dialed-back a bit in Blood Vessel but I don't really have a problem with it. I think letting the audience laugh along with you for a moment before getting back to the scary stuff stops them laughing at you. I'm one of those people who thinks that the toll collector in Hammer's Dracula really helps with the pacing and managing the suspense - that little drop in tension lets you ramp it up even higher afterwards.
As Darrell's post suggests, there's lots to dive into in episode 2. The borrowing from Horror Express is a lot clearer now that we're trapped on a vehicle with a monster.
I'd love to see further series of Dracula but the overnight audience figures have been disappointing so far. I'm hoping that it will pick up considerably when the consolidated figures come in as people start to binge on recordings and catch up on iPlayer.
Obviously I still haven't seen any of it yet but the points CMM makes about the script and The Gatiss´s seeming need to add humour, in jokes etc. and not just play it "straight" is what often irritates me about his work...even though these things are put there for people such as myself...oh, and you lot! :)
Still no major spoilers from me - but wasn't it nice to see The Amicus Hand doing a cameo?! (with all the CGI tech that 2020 can offer, the choice to have the hand lolloping along at snail's pace was surely an attempt to party like its ~~AND NOW THE SCREAMING STARTS!)
Add to this references to THE TOMB OF LIGEIA, THE DEVIL RIDES OUT, RASPUTIN THE MAD MONK, ZOMBIE FLESH EATERS, and more (one I won't mention, in relation to the ending...) and it was a treat for buffs. Story-wise, well up to standard - loved spending so much time aboard the Demeter this evening.
When in the prologue we hear Mina writing that Jonathan should avail himself of all the women who cross his path, while she'll do the same with her admirers, the butcher's boy and the pub barmaid ('for a little variety') I feared the worst. When the prologue ends with the nun asking Jonathan " Mr Harker, I need to know. Did you have sexual intercourse with Count Dracula?" it seemed to confirm the worst in the sense that the writers would fill the 90 minutes with such attempts to render their work 'audacious'. Luckily once they'd got that out of their system they settled down to the task in hand and overall did a good job in making the Count a figure to be feared once more. I liked that, and the fact of having a strong antagonist, the atmosphere, locations, sets, lighting ... Unfortunately, the juvenile quips come thicker and faster as the show goes on, diluting the atmosphere generated previously. I wish Mr Gatiss would refrain from this kind of thing, but ever since Sherlock it's kind of been his trade mark. :-(
But overall I enjoyed the first episode - atmospheric and creepy and gory. The castle was a character in itself. Nice to see a gutsy Van Helsing and some consideration given to 'theology'. Dracula is at last returned to being a scary bastard, though the Cockernee Geezer quips and oneliners are SO annoying. Perhaps Mr Gatiss feels uncomfortable doing 'straight' horror/drama without his tried and tested humour dotted throughout, but I really find the jokes distracting, as well as some anachronistically 21st century, standard TV idioms "I need you to...", "Why would I do that?" Some wit and irony doesn't go amiss, but during the slaughter of the nuns Dracula comes over like Sean Pertwee in Dog Soldiers. A shame, because the confrontation at the gates was quite compelling (despite it being plainly obvious that Harker would shortly invite the Count inside) and the overall look and feel of the production is spot on. When not quipping, Dracula is the menacing and evil supernatural creature I'd been waiting to see again. Also fun to spot the in-jokes - the number of hammers lying around, the line 'I have a detective friend in London', etc
I loved it. Lots of stuff straight out of Stoker, lots of preposterously entertaining nonsense that could have come from 70s Hammer if they had bigger budgets. I really appreciate that it is out-and-out nasty with a Count who is very much not a romantic hero.
Rather impressive so far. Can't say too much in case of spoilers (though you all saw it, didn't you?). Some have taken against the humour, but it's working for me. That scene in the catacombs is deservedly getting lots of attention. The 'Sherlock' 90 minute format looks as though it will allow for development and breathing space for some familiar story elements - it'll be good to spend a fair bit of time on the Demeter tonight.
Radio Times article: https://www.radiotimes.com/news/2019-12-07/bbc-one-dracula-pictures-nuns/
Looks like The Demeter is getting extended treatment.
Let's hope it'll be better than War Of The Worlds.
It can officially be confirmed that Dracula begins on New Year's Day.
I'd rather do without the major pus that Mal mentions ;-). As it is there seems to be enough gross/revolting stuff going on.
The nail bit was the nasty part, looks a bit busy. Not sure about the nun stake corps. Stil the production values look good, so style should be fine, no lets see what they do with the story.
Moo.