DRACULA - THE UNDEAD. Solution. Stoker: A move to next line. B back to start. OPT 1 exit intro. I am Bram Stoker and by the magic of technology I am able to. At last—the sequel to Bram Stoker's classic novel Dracula, wri. of “sequels” to classic novels, I ill-advisedly started Dracula The Undead in the optimistic hope. Dracula the Undead [Freda Warrington, Matthew Waterson] on plicanodfratran.gq * FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The legend returns. It is seven years since .
|Language:||English, Arabic, German|
|ePub File Size:||20.62 MB|
|PDF File Size:||13.68 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
Dracula the Un-dead is a sequel to Bram Stoker's classic novel Dracula. The book was written For the novel by Freda Warrington, see Dracula the Undead ( novel) .. Print/export. Create a book · Download as PDF · Printable version. Castle Dracula, as there are no maps of this country as yet to no fear, but that other to whom is there that she is UnDead, he have not the. Monstrous Literature: The Case of Dacre Stoker's Dracula the Undead Hannah Priest Abstract Dracula the Undead describes itself as the 'official' sequel to.
Dacre Stoker shows us that the Stoker name has survived throughout the years Dacre is a great-grand-nephew but the writing talent has not. I was expecting something good and different. One out of two isn't bad. It IS different. Taking place 20 years or so after the evnts of the classic original, this takes place mostly in London. The premise is that the intrepid band of adventurers who fought Dracula is being killed one by one. Who is responsible? From here we stumble across the characters from Dacre Stoker shows us that the Stoker name has survived throughout the years Dacre is a great-grand-nephew but the writing talent has not.
If that sounds out there-it kinda is. Still the story was, at best, mediocre. It never caputres the gothic darkness of the original work.
It is mostly a low-grade who-done-it combined with a low grade horror story featuring two famous Vampires- Bathory and Dracula. Where this book fails is in the reinvention of the Dracula myth.
Framing him as a God-fearing Vampire, who was always serving God is ummmm a bit of a stretch. It does not help the story and lowers it to the level of a WB show with silly vampire teens. It wasn't terrible but the evident promise of the story, in the start of the novel, is truly wasted. The ending was not to my liking. None of the characters, save Bathory, have any true personality. Most of the original cast have devolved into Trgolodytic caricatures of themselves and the new hero of Quincey Mina and Johnathon's son is a silly prat.
Doesn't make for a great read. Still it is ok. Considering some of the awful books out there this one will at least keep you reading till the end. That's when you will think "Did I just waste my time? View all 3 comments. Oct 15, Anita rated it did not like it. Dracula the un-dead? Bathory bigger than dracula? Jun 10, Roberta rated it it was ok. That's the good news -- I got it for free. Actually, there were about characters in the book and the game of recognizing them started distracting me from the plot.
Besides for characters from the original book, Bram Stoker was a character in the book plus lots of the real people that he associated with as well as many characters with the names of actors who have played Dracula.
Dracula the Undead... a chilling sequel to Bram Stoker's great classic, Dracula
For example, there was a character in the book named Langella. There were some good action scenes and Ian Holt probably hopes that it will make a great movie. Two stars was an act of charity because Dacre Stoker seems like such a nice guy. Nov 06, Rahul Matthew rated it it was ok. I know flipping a Dracula book!! Es obvio que eso le viene grande.
Ni creo que sus autores pretendiesen que fuese exactamente eso cuando lo escribieron. No lo es. Esta novela siempre me produjo recelo. Incluso incorpora elementos de la peli de Coppola gran filme y remodela la historia original en todos los aspectos, incluso fechas, para que sean posibles los hechos que suceden. Segundo, no se parece ni remotamente al libro de Bram Stoker. Los personajes son incluso diferentes Jun 17, Konnersdad rated it did not like it.
So I read this after reading Dracula, which I throughly enjoyed. I forced myself through this turdfest of a book until the bitter end. So Dracula's a good guy, now? Jonanthan is now a drunk in a loveless marriage? Mina got knocked up by Dracula and she's in love with Dracula? Seward's a morphine addict? Van Hesling my favorite charter from the pervious book is a tratious old codger? Lesbian incest with an old fat aunt?
The Titanic? Okay stop!!!!! None of these characters sh So I read this after reading Dracula, which I throughly enjoyed. None of these characters showed ANY inclination of ending up like this! This is worse than the Twilight books and that saying something!!!!
These people obviously care alot about each other and for them to end up like this, Dacre you're lucky that great uncle Bram didn't raise from the dead himself and strangle you for this kidneystone of a book.
How did Dracula come back? Why kill off the great charaters in the first book and make them into a bunch of hateful loosers? And then add your great uncle Bram as a charater? Ian Holt, my dogs are better Dracula experts than you.
I only wish I could give this horrid piece of trash 0 stars. The only good thing about this book is that at least Dracula didn't sparkle. Mar 05, Cyndie rated it it was amazing Shelves: I loved this book. I did not go into the book expecting to be gripped by the literary writing style of Bram Stoker and perhaps that is why I was able to enjoy the book.
If you want the classic, then go read the classic. Dracula the Un-Dead is a strong book that stands on its own.
Stoker and Holt put an end to the happily ever after of the first book setting the tone for the sequel. The reflection of the horrific events imparted on the characters was invigorating and gripped me from the very first page. The characters stay true to form. The seeds for their implosion were all set into motion during the original book. Stoker and Holt give the reader just enough back-story to understand what happened in the original and even answer some of the questions I was left with.
The story is fast-paced, with rich characters, and a good old vampire plot. No, it is not the classic, but it is definitely worth a read. View 2 comments. I'm a huge fan of the original Dracula, and I find this latest offering by Dacre to be paltry in comparison. I suppose the social context in which it was written has a lot to do with it. A lot has changed in the time between the two books, the original was published in and the latter was published in and the sort of graphic sadism and demonized lesbianism prevalent in this book is indicative of a generation obsessed with shock value.
For an example of this, please see any film in the I'm a huge fan of the original Dracula, and I find this latest offering by Dacre to be paltry in comparison. For an example of this, please see any film in the growing genre of torture-porn i.
I find the whole thing quite off putting, and would love a return to the days when authors and directors didn't have to resort to this sort of thing to provoke a reaction from their audience.
Also off putting is the rough manner in which Dacre and Holt handle the beloved characters of the original novel. I realize that it's important to the continuation of the story to further develop these characters, but did they have to turn every single person into a sad shell of their original selves? And finally, there seems to be some confusion on the authors part as to which story line they're continuing.
Where in the original book was there any reference to Mina 'betraying' John and falling in love with Dracula? In the original, Mina was a victim of Dracula, a heartless demon who only sought blood to prolong his own life. Other elements of the original core characters also deviate from the first novel. Now keep in mind that I've only read so much of the book. This is but a first impression, and everything I've said up to this point could be turned on its head within the next few pages. The book itself is an exciting read, and I do enjoy the historical elements Dacre has added to enrich the story and anchor it in the real world.
I am not a fan, however, of the wanton use of Bram's name and reputation by his far removed descendant to cash in on a pop-culture craze. Perhaps the tag line to his book should read "The true sequel to the Movie version of the original classic, as re-imagined by Bram Stoker's great grandnephew and some other guy.
Jul 26, Cheryl Marren rated it really liked it.
Log in to Wiley Online Library
I know that many people have readily slated this book as being ridiculous. That's up to them. I like to take books as I find them and rate them on how well written and well-researched I think they are, whether I can learm anything from them, whether they show me a new way of looking at things and finally and mostly whether I enjoy reading them.
For me, this ticked all the boxes in the affirmative.
It's probably not perfect, possibly not the vision Bram Stoker would have imagined. But at the en I know that many people have readily slated this book as being ridiculous. But at the end of the day, this is a good book written with good intentions and I think it's great.
So there. De este libro hice muchos comentarios en el avance de la lectura, que recomiendo leer para completar este comentario final. Otro contra es que el detective llega a poner de los nervios con las deducciones que hace. Vale que, nosotros como lector, le llevamos ventaja en el caso, pero es que muchos de sus razonamientos no tienen sentido.
Porque parece que cada autor ha escrito una parte, pero sin estar de acuerdo con el otro. Nov 10, Richard added it. This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers.
To view it, click here. Calling this book an official sequel is ludicrous! The novel Dracula lays out in frightening detail Count Dracula's cruel nature and his plans to travel to England to feed off the teeming millions there.
This pathetic excuse to cash in on a family name and beloved novel completely ignores what Bram Stoker wrote and to further insult fans of the original novel, it incorporates bits and pieces of the Coppola film,adds in historical figures which are completely irrelevant and rearranges dates Calling this book an official sequel is ludicrous! This pathetic excuse to cash in on a family name and beloved novel completely ignores what Bram Stoker wrote and to further insult fans of the original novel, it incorporates bits and pieces of the Coppola film,adds in historical figures which are completely irrelevant and rearranges dates to crowbar in the Jack the Ripper murders.
It seems that the authors have little love for Bram's characters. What worked so well in the original novel besides excellent writing was its simplicity: Dracula was a monster. The band of heroes who rallied against him were all pure and good. Supernatural evil vs. In this poorly written "sequel",Dracula is somehow more of a force for good.
Not only that but now vampires turn to ash in the sunlight. And Dracula is some kind of sexual Tyrannosaurus who Mina loves now.
And Dracula didnt turn Lucy into a vampire because he's evil. Oh no he did it to save her from Van Helsings botched blood transfusion. And on and on. This novel on its own makes very little sense. As a sequel to Dracula though it leaves one at turns disgusted and sorely disapointed.
Oct 03, CaliGirlRae rated it did not like it Shelves: I have to say I was ecstatic to read Dracula Undead, especially knowing it was written by a direct descendant from the Stoker family and authorized by its estate.
I found myself excited when I received the gorgeous book in dark red and crinkled aged paper stain design that made it look like it was ancient. Even the pages themselves were gorgeously put together.
I was a little nervous about the blurb which told where all of our heroes were. Heroes that fell from grace, sure, but maybe there's a s I have to say I was ecstatic to read Dracula Undead, especially knowing it was written by a direct descendant from the Stoker family and authorized by its estate. Heroes that fell from grace, sure, but maybe there's a spiffy character arc that puts them through the ringer and they will eventually arise to fight through it all. Alas, no.
As I read Dracula Undead, my excitement slowly waned. Everything that was amazing, classic and wonderful about Dracula was unraveled in a few chapters of this "sequel". Where Dracula created a sense of dread, fear and uneasiness through the power of word and mood, Dracula Undead bashes the reader over the head with gore, dismemberment, impalement and depraved characters.
Bram Stoker himself even makes an appearance, which could have been interesting, but instead falls flat as a washed up has-been in a loveless marriage trying to regain his once literary status by making his famous Dracula into a play.
Played by actor John Barrymore no less. It is the last reach for struggling to regain his celeb status for the last time. Dracula himself is merely in the book despite given a description in the blurb and in the title.
In fact, everyone but Dracula is in this book including Jack the Ripper style murders and investigations. Dracula Undead suffers from too many cooks in the kitchen with no idea where to go. Once the reader gets an idea for where the story may be headed, it takes another turn as if the camera cuts away from this scene to start a completely new one and so on and so on.
There are about four or five stories going on at the same time with too many characters which doesn't give the story the focus it deserves. I couldn't help noticing that this book isn't quite a sequel to Bram Stoker's Dracula, at least definitely not in mood and continuity. Its action packed, dark, gory blood splattered and sexually drenched pages matched that of a narrative version of a script for a big budget follow up to Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Dracula.
As I looked into the making of this book, I found out Ian Holt, co-writing with Dacre Stoker, was the main driving force for this book and he is indeed a screenwriter who plans to bring this book to the big screen next year. I don't think I'll be watching it.
Dracula the Undead pdf free
I wasn't too jazzed about Coppola's Dracula and from the mixture of real life Bathory mixed with fictional characters complete with incestuous deflowering by her Aunt and a blood relation to Dracula himself , it looks like we'll be seeing more of the same as in the first film. Dracula Undead as the inklings of a well written story that falls short.
I did like the setting until it turned into Blade: Unfortunately, from the author's voice and treatment of said characters, I get the feeling that the authors didn't like the characters nor Stoker himself very much. It definitely shows in how different and cold these characters are from the original story. If this book was called something else in another world with other characters and a completely separate situation, the chance of enjoyment would be a bit higher barring the overstuffed narrative at times.
But knowing and loving Dracula by Bram Stoker, the history for how it came about and the wonderful addition it's given to horror and gothic literature, I can't recommend or enjoy this current book. There's another book similarly titled Dracula Undead by Freda Warrington that will be re-released this December. I hear it keeps the tone, continuity and care for the characters introduced in Dracula.
I think that one may be more enjoyable. Apr 01, Courtney Bowman rated it did not like it Shelves: When my dad told me that there was going to be a sequel to Dracula coming out and it was written by the great grand-nephew of Bram Stoker I got excited. I could not wait to get my hands on Dracula Un-Dead. I was hoping that it would end the modernized verison of vampires that Stephanie Meyer created. But I was wrong. I am going to first say that I am glad that I did not download this book, instead I found it while I was looking through the shelves at the library for a good read.
With eagerness I snat When my dad told me that there was going to be a sequel to Dracula coming out and it was written by the great grand-nephew of Bram Stoker I got excited. With eagerness I snatched the book off the shelf like someone was going to snatch it before I could.
When I got home from the library I headed straight to the area where I spend most of my days reading and never said anything to anybody. When my dad came to check on me to make sure I was still living I was trying to get over the fact that the writers used Bram Stoker as a character. I was not too thrilled by that fact and I am sure Bram Stoker wouldn't be either. Some parts felt like it was a sequel to the original and other parts felt like it was a sequel to the film adaption 'Bram Stokers Dracual'.
It should say, 'Based off the Original Classic'. I have to be honest I have yet to finish this book and I am not sure if I can.
It is getting rather predictable and the characters are getting on my nerves, or is it just the writers writing? Dacre is not a horrible writer, but it feels like I should be reading a movie script, not a novel. There are moments were the lack of details makes reading this novel boring and some details are well written that I can feel my heart beating out of my chest.
But I think the writers did not know where they wanted to go with this story. There are a few times where I found myself saying, "what? And why in the world is Barrymore in this story? I was thrown off for a bit with that and also Oscar Wilde being mentioned.
As for the characters I was not happy with what they did to Van Helsing. Seward, I can picture him becoming an addict and spending the rest of his life chasing vampires. I also did not like what they did to Mina and Johnathon. Why would Mina fall in love with Dracula? The fact that she kept calling him her 'Dark Prince' got under my skin each time. Johnathon would never go around with prositutes and be an alcholic. Although I can see what the writers where trying to get at with with the characters they just needed to spend more time on them, I think.
I am going to leave this review as it is, I have much to say about this book. I could spend hours pointing out the flaws and butcher the book to pieces, but it as all been said before on here. I have read many reviews where I agree with fans of the original Dracuala and they said it all: Dracula The Un-Dead is a disappointment.
Finished listening to this tale about "the band of heroes" a phrase heard endlessly over the course of this story. Suffise to stay: You won't be sorry. Everything you liked in Dracula will be missing from these pages. Just the opposite. Where Bram Stoker used words to mount tension, adventure and mystery, Dacre Stoker fills his pages with whiney, pale characters and lots of violence.
And blood. OMG the melodrama! Really, I don't see a high rating for this Update. Really, I don't see a high rating for this book. Stereotypes, bad writing, crudity I'm no prude but a story, even with violence, should revolve around the story and not how much gore can be added in a few pages. And, these last 3 discs are excrutiatingly slow. Dacre is padding his work. I find it rather disrespective for Dacre to include his great-uncle?? Dacre, remember that without Bram, you wouldn't ever have published a book.
You're not that good. Maybe I'll push through tomorrow and get it over with. Chopper" - https: Dec 26, Gynger rated it did not like it. I'm unsure as to what to say about this book.
I got it for christmas as was extremely excited to read it, in fact I read it in 2 days with interruption of course. I suppose I should start of by saying that I have actually read the first Dracula and I love the story on so many levels.
With this book I was looking forward to getting away of the horrid things Twilight has done to the vampire myths and going back to people that should have a vested interest in keeping the original ideals. This was I'm unsure as to what to say about this book. This was not that case.
The Un-dead started with promise, while I didn't know where the female vampire story was going, it did show steward in the way I would expect him 25 years later, still chasing vampires. And, of course, you need a descendent to carry on the fight Quincy from Mina and Jonathan.
I can even justify the idea of making Dracula a good guy in "Wicked" style not that I approve as Dracula's cool calculating evil is what made him such an intriguing character to begin with, still I'm trying to give it the ben. It was like the author didn't know which direction he they wanted to go so many were taken.
I adore the story of Jack the Ripper as well but I can't tell you how upset I was when he was first introduced. And John Barrymore? I have to agree with everyone that said it just seemed like bad fan fic, that is it completely. Two guys got together and wanted to see how they could make some money on the vampire fad, sadly Stokers name had to be drug into it.
Honestly I think that he would be turning in his grave. The entire essence of the original was lost I don't understand how anyone who actually read the original liked this one but to each their own I suppose. Also, a final note. When they ended with the Titanic reference at the end that was it for me, there was no way to save it. I put the book down in an actual state of mourning. Oct 20, Susan Garrett rated it it was ok Recommends it for: Downloaded this from site and thank the Lorhd I didn't pay hardcover price for it.
What a frustrating book!
The name-checking of entertainment types who have had something to do with Dracula - cheap, boring and distracting. Another apologist version of Dracula misunderstood Wallachian Christian hero - yaaaawn. The action was frenetic - there are a few good 'race to get somewhere scenes' - but the characters' inner monologues were laughably bad. Quincey Morris son of Jonathan and Mina Harker is an arrogant, self-obsessed fool. There are failable characters and then there are idiots - this one is an idiot.
In fact, none of the characters are even vaguely recognizable from Stoker's novel. And that's the sad bit, really, because this was an attempt to regain control over the character and bring it back into the family.
And they do. So maybe it was the author's way of making certain you didn't feel badly about their hideous demise? If so, it's damned awkward and annoying. Come to think of it, I've not read a book in which entrails feature so prominently.
Bathory is the big bad no spoiler and is possibly the only well-drawn and interesting character, but when push comes to shove she twirls her mustache trust me, she's probably had one and is prepared to tie the tempting bit of bait to the railroad tracks in the best Snidely Whiplash impersonation, evah! We are talking melodrama that is so far over the top, it's down the other side. The kicker is that the characters' motives and the plot never really make sense.
I kept thinking longingly of one of the better apologist Dracula novels The Dracula Tapes, by Saberhagen and this book doesn't come close to that class.
If you want to read a decent Dracula pastiche, pick up The Historian. It's a much better read, you get a serious bang for your buck, it won't melt your brain, and it's large enough to use to kill vermin.
Please, do not be offended by what is to follow. Did Bram Stoker himself give his approval? That is, to me, a very negligible argument since from now on, anyone named Stoker could come up with a piece of work about vampires and call it an official sequel.
And, as we all know, there is a place for fan fiction - the internet. We do not expect to see it on the shelves of our bookstores. And so the monster is dangerous, a form suspended between forms that threatens to smash distinctions.
It carries with it the unsettling suggestion that we might have been wrong - maybe anyone can write a novel. Maybe there is no distinction between fan fiction and literature.
My second argument for the monstrosity of Dracula the Undead concerns intertextuality and chronology. Monsters frequently trouble temporal categories. Dracula the Undead also troubles our notion of the progression of time. Langella and Inspector Huntley - all named for actors who portrayed Dracula in the late twentieth-century. More striking than this, however, is the obvious influence of film and television. The vampire was moving too fast to check her momentum: She impaled herself through the heart on the sharp, broken end of the walking stick.
And it is impossible to read the final confrontation between Quincey and Dracula, as the young hero attempts to kill the dark lord, only to discover in the final seconds that he is, in fact, his father, without thinking of Luke Skywalker and Darth Vadar.
Even though we know that Dracula the Undead was written in , a novel set in should not make intertextual reference to Buffy the Vampire Slayer. In an essay on Beowulf, Ruth Waterhouse argues: Although intertextuality assumes relationships between one text and others, it does not presuppose that those relationships are only linear and chronological. If for an individual a more recent text is a starting point for the exploration of older texts, that intertextuality is as relevant as any other.
Rather, the book functions as a monster, revealing often in a somewhat heavy-handed way our own preconceptions, prejudices and fears. It unsettles the relationships between author, text and reader, and encourages scrutiny of the culture which created it, and of the community which rejected it.
Dissatisfied readers have suggested that this monster be at best ignored, at worst destroyed. Bibliography Cohen, J. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, , pp.
Eagleton, T. Stoker, B.At the very beginning of the seventeenth century it underwent a siege of three weeks and lost 13, people, the casualties of war proper being assisted by famine and disease. But the wolf puts his head back and howls; and suddenly, from every direction, huge white sheepdogs come running, fiercer than wolves, barking and snarling, their ears down and lips drawn back to reveal ferocious teeth. Considering some of the awful books out there this one will at least keep you reading till the end.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Abraham Van Helsing , now a sickly old man, returns to London after hearing of Seward's death.