Jump to content

Dracula: Discussion Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 24
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Administrator

Dracula

Golden Globe winner Jonathan Rhys Meyers (“The Tudors”) stars in this provocative new drama as one of the world’s most iconic characters. It’s the late 19th century and the mysterious Dracula (Rhys Meyers) has arrived in London, posing as an American entrepreneur who wants to bring modern science to Victorian society. He’s especially interested in the new technology of electricity, which promises to brighten the night — useful for someone who avoids the sun. But he has another reason for his travels: He hopes to take revenge on those who cursed him with immortality centuries earlier. Everything seems to be going according to plan… until he becomes infatuated with a woman who appears to be a reincarnation of his dead wife. Victoria Smurfit (“About a Boy”), Thomas Kretschmann (“King Kong”), Jessica De Gouw (“Arrow”), Oliver Jackson-Cohen (“Mr. Selfridge”), Nonso Anozie (“Game of Thrones”) and Katie McGrath (“Merlin”) also star.

Writer Daniel Knauf (“Carnival”), Tony Krantz, (“24,” “Sports Night”), Colin Callender and Gareth Neame (“Downton Abbey”) serve as executive producers. “Dracula” is a production of Flame Ventures, Sky Living, Playground Entertainment, Universal Television, NBCUniversal International Television Production and Carnival Film & Television.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
  • Members

This actually wasn't bad at all. It's a completely new version but all the main characters are present. I honestly don't know why they had to reimagine Dracula as a heroic anti-hero out to get revenge on the sinister secret society that seeks to run the world through economic influence, the original story has served him well for 120 years, but it works. The show is beautiful and scenic, and JRM does a good job, I guess the biggest switch up is Van Helsing's role in this one. Renfield has been changed from being a slave to basically being Alfred to Dracula's Bruce Wayne. And I guess that is what Dracula is in this TV show, a Batman that is a little more Bat than the one in Gotham. But it is harmless fun and I will watch faithfully.

One thing, the sword fight with the matrixy slo-mo effects wasn't really needed. Dracula doesn't need to waste his time on stuff like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't know what they were thinking here. Why on earth is this show set in past and in London? And why is Dracula American? WTF? It is nonsensical. They could have saved a boat load of money and just had Dracula flee London and come to modern day America to escape his persecutors. Instead JRM has to put on this bad fake accent. Ugh. This show has made itself far more convoluted and given itself unnecessary problems.

Also, by setting the show in London in the early 20th century, they are reducing the diversity of the show. This is so thoughtless and stupid. Compare this to Sleepy Hollow that embraces diversity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Of all the things to complain about, the audacity to set Dracula in 19th century London? That's a complaint, that they kept one thing from the book?

Dracula being American is lame, but I guess since it is co-produced by an American company they thought it might appeal more to our audience. It is also co-produced by British TV, so I guess they needed something to appeal to their audiences as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Isn't he masquerading as an American? That's why his "Alfred" corrected his British pronunciation of the word "schedule".

Eh...I didn't get it. I wouldn't know Dracula lore if it bit me in the neck, but this seemed really complicated. It's pretty...that's the most I can really say about it.

And I was much more impressed with Jessica de Gouw on Arrow. Are women really studying surgery in Britain in 1896?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think the show looks fantastic, but I'm not at all sold on the secret society angle. It's obviously a way to minimize Dracula's evil and make him more of a Barnabas Collins figure, sympathetic to the audience. But in the age of Dexter, Tony Soprano and Walter White, I don't think that's needed. Plus, JRM's American accent is really distracting ... and I swear he looks like he's high most of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

They always do that on network tv. They are afraid to have real bad guys as the leads so they try to find ways to soften the characters. It is pathetic. Frankly, I got lost with the convoluted mystery society story and could not tell who was who half the time. I will give it a couple more episodes, but it needs to improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members

I am still trying with this show, but it is such a bore. Of course, Dracula was turned evil against his will. He is a victim. RME. Everyone lusting after Mina is so pathetic as is just about everything with this show. Why not have the Katie McGath character lust after Harker instead?They could have let the gay couple survive. I continue to hang in there hoping things will improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't believe there is a vampire movie I have not seen and I own a considerable amount of VHS and DVDs, but I just can't get into this. JRM is not working for me. I love the production of the show from the sets to the clothing, but it ends there. As much as I love undead movies/tv shows, I can't get thru an entire eppy of this. I've given up trying, and I'm giving up Grimm as well. Perhaps, if I check in by accident down the road, something may click.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This plays like a 19th century version of The Following. Maybe that's just me, but it spends more time focused on blood and gore than story. Grimm at least took the time to build its mythology. Dracula acts like everyone already knows it, and if you don't, like me, you feel lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think the show spends time on the story. The problem is it and the over arching myth arc is so freaking boring and convoluted. Also, there are so many supporting characters, I can barely keep track of who is who. It takes me forever to figure distinguish one of the society members from each other when they appear in scenes even though I recognize many of the actors from British shows that I have watched over the years. When the young man killed himself, it was the first time I realized who his father was among those skulking men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • In a way, it's a shame that Lynne Adams decided to leave the show when she did, because I think Mike and Leslie were positioned very well to become GL's tentpole couple.
    • Correct. Lynne Adams (Leslie) decided she wanted to leave the show, as Leslie hadn't been given much to do since Adams returned as Leslie in 1973 (and now everyone can witness her first scene returning as Leslie in 1973 on YT - unreal) I don't think the Dobsons tried to stop that from happening, as I think they wanted Mike single again. I agree, @DeeVee - they should have let Mike and Leslie have a child together. I wonder it they thought it would be too strange to have two siblings that could also be cousins 

      Please register in order to view this content

      . As far as Ed and Holly go, at least they allowed Ed to show up at the end of TGL and take Holly on a "trip around the world". IMHO, I don't think Peter Simon had as much chemistry with Maureen Garrett as Mart Hulswit had, but I'm glad the show gave them a final scene together.
    • IF this gets a renewal I can't see LY sticking around    
    • Well, I'm glad to know Devane and I are on the same wavelength, lol.  But seriously.  I don't believe there's any other word to describe the machinations that the producers constructed in the name of keeping Greg and Paige apart.  Greg and Paige made Sam and Diane look mature by comparison! Which would have been just as well, since a character like Greg Sumner didn't really belong in the '90's, as the storyline with the task force proved only too well.  If KL had returned for another season, it would've needed a MASSIVE overhaul, including ditching Greg, Paige, Claudia and Anne.  Mack and Karen would've needed to be there for the sake of continuity; and maybe some mileage could've been gained from exploring Gary's new life as a widowed single father.  (I still would've loved to bring back Julie Harris and have Lilimae help Gary take care of the twins).  Otherwise, it would've been a new era for KL, one without The Sumner Group, or stories like Wolfbridge and Empire Valley.
    • This is "Last Call" for anyone who wants to download a copy of any of these Award show files. Daytime Emmys, Full Episodes: 1982, .. 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, .. 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995 Daytime Emmys, Extras or Partials: 1990 1998 SOD Awards
    • What he said. 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Didn't she know when she involved him in her scheme, before the character was introduced? I thought she tracked down Janice's son and poisoned his mind against Rachel in order to get him on board.  It's a bit confusing because in the summer of 1988 we get a lot of Drew Marsten (whom I had forgotten was Nicole's ex) and mentions of a mysterious Countess and also Reginald working to undermine Cory. Drew disappears around the same time Evan arrives, and gradually we get the reveals that he is in cahoots with Iris, Janice's son, etc. 
    • I apply totally different standards. For Felicia & anyone else in Bay City it's reel as opposed to out here in the universe where it's real.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy