BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » New Dracula show for the BBC

nakahara · December 24, 2019 1:59 pm

And if you can´t sleep tonight, Mark has another documentary broadcasted just after midnight:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03n2rnc

nakahara · December 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Mark Gatiss had an interview about Dracula project:

https://twitter.com/EvilsHero/status/1204763694325993473

And another one:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000c9mz

Last edited by nakahara (December 27, 2019 11:14 pm)

Yitzock · December 29, 2019 4:02 pm

Watched the video of the TV interview. Very pleasant to listen to, and I agree that Mark's appearance in a show or movie is always a pleasant surprise!
I never knew the idea of Dracula was a combination of version, though it only makes sense! I just never thought about it.
I agree with Mark about there being too much television, even though there's lots of good things to explore and discover, there is so much!
I found it odd the Sherlock image was blurred.

Liberty · January 2, 2020 9:56 am

So who has seen it? What did you think? I loved it! I like how they've played with the vampire tropes, and all the references to other films. So much fun! I won't say too much as I know not everybody will have seen it yet and will be avoiding spoilers, and I've noticed that some of the reviews do give away some minor things.

SusiGo · January 3, 2020 8:17 pm

I have seen ep. 1 and 2 and like it very much. Different from Sherlock and then also so very similar. The end of ep. 2 - OMG! Do we have to get spoiler warnings again? Or change the thread title?

Liberty · January 3, 2020 10:45 pm

I have seen all 3 now! Probably do need a spoiler title now that it's aired! I won't say anything spoilery just yet .

SusiGo · January 4, 2020 9:03 pm

Since today it has been on Netflix. I think we can start an open discussion now.

nakahara · January 5, 2020 12:53 am

I don´t like gory stuff so I watched the series mostly for locations. I somehow managed to miss Episode 2 but saw both Episode 1 and 3.

As for locations, I was content with both the usage of Orava Castle and Old Castle of Banská Štiavnica, the series served as a great advertisement for them both! Thank you Moftiss! The balcony of Orava Castle with the river Orava underneath and the scary building at the court of the Old Castle which served as "the convent" - they were both turned into settings of some creepy scenes! Kudos to that!

As for the episodes:

SPOILERS

I found Episode 1 to be quite all right. I was disturbed by some gory images, but the episode was well written and interesting, IMHO, althrough a bit wordy at times. I immediately liked Sister Agatha, sensing that she would be the female Van Helsing almost right away, but stil enjoying "the twist". I felt great pity and sympathy for Jonathan and Mina, Jonathan´s part was wonderfully acted. I still shudder at the scene in which he has to choose the date of his demise - being disguised as the date of the letter. Brilliant acting there. The scary discovery of his precedessors (hidden in boxes) was utterly chilling and I enjoyed it very much, as well as a scene of his jump from the balcony.

I am still torn over Claes Bang. His acting during dialogs was superb, but unfortunately, every time his Dracula supposedly attacked Jonathan with fangs, I found it quite cheesy.

I loved how we discovered the story through Jonathan´s narrative (good nod to the book). I have some issues with the pacing - the scene of Sister Agatha taunting of Dracula at the court of the convent took forever! Also, it was obvious the writers only devise some characters as the unimportant plumbing - like those "nuns" who only stood there motionlessly and didn´t even protest when Sister Agatha risked all their lives. Bizarre.

Anyway, I liked Episode 1.

As for Episode 3, this was another animal altogether. I can´t shake the feeling that Mofftiss initially planned to do entire Series 2 of Dracula out of it, but decided against it in the process of writting the scenario and crammed it all into one badly planned episode which suffered greatly in the process. We were introduced into lot of new stuff and characters every two minutes and so nothing of this new stuff could really grow on us. For example the institute grounded by Mina Harker was cool but entirely unexplained. I cheered when Matthew Beard appeared - I totally loved him in Vienna Blood - but then he had like three muinutes screen time? What a pity!

Also, the story wasted more than 40 minutes on stuff that was actually "The Final Problem" all over. The sea, the ship and helicopters - check. The supernaturally strong being being held in glass cell - check. Supernatural being escaping with ease - check. Dracula using twitter and modern gadgets - so what? Lucy being burned while conscious for the "hideous crime" of being a tad vain and vacuous? Who writes this medieval stuff?

Although, the method in which Van Helsing finally got rid of Dracula was original, I´ll give you that!

Not a very good episode, IMHO.

What was more wonderful than the entire series was Mark´s document "In search of Dracula". Beautiful and informative all the way, with tips for many interesting movies and featuring Slovak locations in all their glory! That was sheer beauty!

Liberty · January 5, 2020 9:08 am

Thank you for your review, Nakahara. I think I agree with you on just about everything. Although you have to see episode 2! Overall, I loved the trilogy. I quite liked the pacing of it being every night instead of every week, so the previous night's was fresh in your mind.   But I was a little bit disappointed with the last episode. The first episode was absolutely brilliant! The second was really good, and the third seemed to lose it's way.   Really frustrating, as I thought the cast were brilliant.

SPOILERS FOLLOW!

I agree with you about what seemed to be the judgement of Lucy - it did feel that she had to suffer a horrible fate because of the terrible crime of vanity. It bothered me partly because I've seen it in other films, the idea that once she'd lost her looks she might as well be dead, and wanted to die herself. (I know she was undead anyway!).

I agree that Matthew Beard was wasted, and I liked Mark's character, but there wasn't a huge amount of point to Seward and Renfield.   I'm sure they were originally a psychiatrist and a patient, which might have fitted well with the psychoanalytic take on Dracula at the end. Instead they were a ... sort of doctor, but not really - was he supposed to be a medical student? And a lawyer.

I didn't buy the ending, and the reason for Dracula's fears. I felt that should have had more build up and background. I also didn't really get the cancer thing - people got cancer and lots of other diseases before the 21st century - wouldn't Dracula have come across it before? Why cancer? It did almost look at the beginning as if they were alluding to HIV (asking if Harker had had sex with Dracula). Actually, that was one thing that struck me - would they have used the term "sexual intercourse" to refer to sex between men in those days? I suspect not, although I could be wrong.

There were a couple of other modernisms which I can't remember now, but I was just thinking during episode 2 that it reminded me a lot of The Abominable Bride - i.e. ostensibly a period setting, but a feeling that something is off and it might be all a dream or something. Which kind of happened - not that it was a dream, but that it ended up in modern times! But I did really like Episode 2.

And Episode 1 was just amazing. I felt that in Episode 1, we were able to identify with Jonathan Harker and follow his story, but it felt as if in the other episodes there was nobody to really identify with and follow along with. Dracula himself was the only character who was in all episodes, although you could argue that Agatha came back through her descendent ... but still that was frustrating. I think I just really wanted to see the original Agatha up against Dracula at the end. I'm not against the idea of bringing it to the present day, but I did feel it lost something.

I agree that some things felt reused - I was reminded of the Final Problem too, but also Doctor Who (the storyline where Cybermen are made from people's bodies, the warning against people being conscious during cremation, and a character comes back as undead in an altered/horrific form and wants to be killed, etc.).

I loved the setting and locations in Episode 1. Episode 2 was very different, but I liked the claustrophobia of it. I thought it was kind of fun that Whitby looks so iconic, and that the view from the sea has changed so little! But I didn't get any sense of place when they were in London - was it London?

Oh, I could go on, and I realise I'm mainly being critical, partly because there is so much that's fun to discuss. I did love that they explored all the Dracula tropes, even if I wasn't entirely happy with the big reveal about crosses, daylight, etc.   It was really fun to have those in and go for an original take on them. I really enjoyed all the quotes and references, and even the silly jokes and puns.    I thought Dolly Wells was stand out. Claes Bang was also excellent. He really got that animalistic side of Dracula while still being very urbane and charming.

Anyway, highly recommended! A homage to the past adaptations, but an original take on it.

Last edited by Liberty (January 5, 2020 9:09 am)

SusiGo · January 5, 2020 9:16 pm

I agree with both of you mostly although it seems I liked ep. 3 more than you, nakahara. I liked the ironic undertones of the whole show and the character of Agatha/Zoe which was amazing. I was not very fond of the Lucy character because she felt very superficial and vain to me. She had no depth as a character. Of course it is a woman's right to enjoy life and explore sexuality but I did not like her as a person and found her quite boring as a character.

I enjoyed the many Sherlock reminiscences - "I have a detective friend in London." Dracula upside down in the coffin compares to the very first Sherlock moment in ASiP. Green tiles everywhere. The whole Baskerville/Sherrinford feelings in the Harker Institute. The fact that the gay best friend does not have to die for once. The Mozart allusion. The "And then there were none" echoes in "Blood Vessel". And so on ...

besleybean · January 6, 2020 6:56 am

Sorry guys, I tried to post straight away.
But I was at my parents and only had my tablet...for some reason, it never seems to allow me to post on here!
I haven't time to scan everybody else's comments, so will just give a quick respone of my thoughts and feelings.
Incidentally, my mother loved it.
Oh and we all loved Mark's documentary about Dracula.
Well I shall re-state that I have zero interest in vampires in general and Dracula in particular.
I really do not do horror.
I ONLY watched this for Mark and Steven.
I actually quite enjoyed it and thought it was very good. All the performances were excellrnt.
I laughed out loud at the Sherlock ref!
My mother is madly in love with Claes(is it?)
He is very good and dishy(particularly in real life),but is still no Bendict for me.

SusiGo · January 6, 2020 9:22 am

besleybean wrote:
My mother is madly in love with Claes(is it?)
He is very good and dishy(particularly in real life),but is still no Bendict for me.

Good for your mother, besley! And yes, I really liked him but no Benedict as you say. Although a white shirt/suspenders combination always manages to seduce me.

Funny enough, I read that Claes Bang is living part-time in Berlin and often appeared on German TV but I had never noticed him.

besleybean · January 6, 2020 5:03 pm

God my daughter-in-law is in Berlin for a week, in April...my mother will want to be going with her, just in case she spots him! Ha.

Liberty · January 6, 2020 6:49 pm

Your mother has good taste, BB! I found Claes quite attractive, I have to admit! But interestingly, I didn't fancy him in The Affair, so it must have been partly the part he was playing. Some incarnations of Dracula are pretty seductive. I don't think he's quite as handsome as Christopher Lee, but I thought he had quite a presence. I certainly won't be writing to the BBC to complain about the nude scene, anyway.

Oh, I enjoyed Mark's doc, too! The teaparty with all the women looked fun!

There's a BBC podcast called "Obsessed With .." which has featured a good chat with Steven and Mark for each episode! Worth a listen https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0742833/episodes/player.

besleybean · January 6, 2020 6:50 pm

Excellent, I love hearing Mark and Steven talking about their work.

nakahara · January 22, 2020 2:46 pm

So what do you think? Will there be a second season of Dracula too?
The ending was a bit ambiguous, so....

SusiGo · January 22, 2020 2:57 pm

Not sure about that. I really like the show but they basically followed the book. And with ACD we have four novels 60+ (?) short stories compared to one Dracula novel. P.S. I still hold out hope for another Sherlock so I may be a bit biased.

nakahara · January 22, 2020 3:02 pm

They can follow some Hammer horror movies too, can´t they?

Liberty · January 22, 2020 3:07 pm

I did see something about a possible Frankenstein series, but that was probably just speculation. It would be fun if they carried on covering classic horror! Or even another Dracula series ... if anyone can rise from the dead, Dracula can! (And Steven is an old hand at resurrecting "dead characters!). I'm not sure where they'd go with it, as I think the modern day episode was the weakest, but would love to see Klaes Bang and Dolly Wells in those parts again!

But maybe there's hope for more Sherlock now they've got Dracula out of their systems. Maybe.

besleybean · January 22, 2020 5:53 pm

Yes this is being discussed on my other Sherlock forum, too!
A big 'Yes, please,' from me!