Main Menu

Dracula - BBC series

Started by Colin YNWA, 02 January, 2020, 06:20:52 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Colin YNWA

Did anyone watch this Steve Moffat Mark Gatiss take on the classic?

Have to be honest the trailers put me off entirely but for one reason or another found myself at a loose end last night and decided to give it a go and it was pretty good actually. Okay the 'smart comedy lines' like "You are what you eat" really jarred and pulled me out but these were few and far between.

The rest was quite excellent. It was a visual treat, creepy when it needed to be and downright terrifying at times. Much gorier than I was expecting to. On a couple of occasions genuinely horrific.

The performances were fantastic too. Full credit to John Heffernan as a wonderful Jonathan Harker who looked and seemed to feel like me as I return to work this morning. Dolly Wells was also superb as a new take on Van Helsing.

Overall an absolute trimuph and can't wait to see the rest.

M.I.K.

I thought a lot of it was daft and over the top, but it's Dracula, so those are probably points in its favour.

The 'reveal' of the identity of Van Helsing didn't really work for me 'cos I twigged who they were pretty much straight away, due to them sounding and acting exactly like Van Helsing.

Leigh S

I think casting Karl Howman as Dracula and letting him ad lib his own lines was a brave choice

Timothy

Bold, stunning telly. The pressure is on for the final episode to land it though.

M.I.K.

Everyone was wondering what was inside no. 9.

Magnetica

I recorded it, but knowing me and what else I have to watch I'll probably get round to it in about 5 years 😂.

pauljholden

Thought it was good fun, figured out ending for part 2 (though expected it to be part 3) because it was pretty much a thing I'd planned to do on a story I have in my big folder of "stories I will never get around to writing"

Colin YNWA

Well in contrast to the positive reviews here I found the second episode a bit of a let down, certainly compared to the first. It lost a lot of the horror elements of the first and moved more into the now traditional sharp witty dialogue that for me came across as self satisfied and articifical ... okay we're dealing with fantasy here so epecting it 'to feel real' is my problem!

The situation had a defined ending, well not the ending ending, but the ending to the characters and this robbed it of tension as it was more like a camp brutal Columbo. We know the end, it was about the way it reached it rather than then being a tense horror mystery.

There's no denying it took things in its own direction and was bold, just didn't work for me. By far the best thing in it was Dolly Wells who I'm no aghast I wasn't aware of before this as she was quite brilliant as Van Helsing. Though there was that line at the end were Karl Howson (genius Leigh S) asking why are you talking, that's not you. All she does it talk so that one really jumped out as daft.

Yeah so while I'm in to the end I hope this one gets to more of the tone of the first episode not Dracula 1972 as I'm kinda expecting as the temptation to turn it into an entirely camp romp takes almost complete control of the writers.

Greg M.

Quote from: Colin YNWA on 03 January, 2020, 06:55:51 AM
All she does it talk so that one really jumped out as daft.

I'll preface my comments by saying that I didn't see the first episode, but thought it would easy enough to just take a look at the second. I shouldn't have bothered - it was excruciatingly awful. Endless reams of smug, self-satisfied, chatty dialogue, undermining any attempt to build up atmosphere, and one of the worst depictions of Dracula ever committed to the screen. (Not the actor's fault, I'm sure - he can only go with the script he's given.)

Timothy


JamesC

Well they fucked that up. Episode 3 is a complete load of arse.

M.I.K.

The last episode was indeed mostly utter guff.

I did like the Peter Cushingesque table-jump, though.

Colin YNWA

Yeah that final episode was an utter let down. I really liked the idea of moving the story to modern England as after all that was the basis of the original book. An ancient monster cast forward to contemporary times. The trouble was it was a bit rubbish.

It seemed as if they got so trapped and enamoured with their deconstruction of vampire lore that they forgot to write decent story. The trouble was their deconstruction was utter bobbins and utterly failed to stand up to examination. The lose of a decent story entirely removed me from caring even if it had been good.

Such a shame after such a strong first episode.

Quote from: JamesC on 03 January, 2020, 10:55:49 PM
Well they fucked that up. Episode 3 is a complete load of arse.

Or to be honest I could have just said that as its a perfect summary!

moly

Really enjoyed this until the 3rd episode what a disappointment

Tiplodocus

Yeah, I'm in the 1.75 out of 3 camp. First episode was excellent fun and fresh (to me), the second actually felt longer than it's 90 minutes despite some good individual bits.

And the third was just very Moffaty. An explanation that makes sort of sense but then has you thinking: No, actually it doesn't. Why is that [spoiler]bit of the tale is  myth that he has tricked himself into believing but this bit is a real supernatural power.[/spoiler]

The tone was a bit off to me too; mobile phone shenanigans  and WiFi password jokes didn't sit well with a [spoiler]charred corpse[/spoiler]. American Werewolf made that work but this didn't. And the treatment of Lucy as a whole made me think the writers really hated that sort of character. Really hated.

I actually really liked Claes Bang - he'd have made a grand Bond 15 years  ago. And why have I never seen Dolly Wells before. She's on my watch list now.
Be excellent to each other. And party on!