I've met Dacre Stoker. He's a likeable character, but 'The Un-dead' is absolute bilge. It's a mess of different ideas that don't really amount to anything. Let's jam Jack the Ripper, let's bolt Star Wars in here, can we fit the Titanic in? Yes, I think we can fit the Titanic in.
'Dracula: The Un-Dead's plot is similar to 'Shadow of a Vampire', which is ironic because 'Shadow of a Vampire' is about the making of a movie that stole its plot from the original 'Dracula'. There's a big spoiler coming up after this sentence, though it's such an obvious twist you'd have to have a skullful of styrofoam popcorn not to see it. 'Shadow of a Vampire' is about the making of a movie about a vampire played by an actor who may or may not be an actual vampire. 'The Un-dead' is about the making of a play based on Dracula starring an actor who may or may not actually be Dracula.
Shadow of a Vampire is good because its ideas actually lead somewhere. It uses its film within a film device to talk about the relationship people have with film, on and off camera.
'The Un-dead' is bad because its ideas lead to nothingtown, population: you, frustrated reader. Its play-within-a-book device is just another tacked on, gimmicky sleight of hand designed to baffle your senses into believing there's an actual novel in your hands instead of wallet-lightening waste of your brain. Still in doubt? Here's a sample sentence: "She tried to escape her misty rapist."
Read Anno Dracula instead. Your brain will thank you for it.
- Anthony Conroy
