Dracula

Here I was. Poised to get on a great adventure with this wonderfully creative series when some TV execs with bad taste kill the series. Loved the 1st season. Imaginative writing, great cast and acting, great reviews. What is it about TV execs that they think we only want garbage reality TV? Corporate America lacks quality in its execs and decision makers. Plenty of proof of that since the 1970's. I think corporations need to start offering these execs minimum wage salaries and if they are successful, then pay them rewarding bonuses...not the other way around. I am continuously amazed at the lack of quality, vision and creativity in corporate America, especially the TV moguls and their ever present stupidity. NBC should be ashamed of its track record in recent years. Once in a while TV puts out some decent productions, very rare.

Dracula is a story that has been done as many times as Pride and Prejudice, sometimes as a success (Bram Stoker's Dracula being a personal favourite), sometimes as a complete utter failure (Dracula 3000).

Thankfully, this version starring Jonathan Rhys Meyers is one towards the successful end of the spectrum. While most of the supporting cast are mediocre, Jonathan Harker, a character often mocked, (looking at you Keanu), here has a very different story than the original, something that was fresh and enjoyable. Oliver Jackson Cohen does a smashing job as Harker, second only to Mr. Dracul himself. Rhys Meyers plays a three-piece suit clad Dracula in this 10 episode series with grace and equal parts cunning and danger. Thomas Kretschmann as a secondary character has given Dr. Van Helsing a new outlook as well.

Overall, this is a retelling of an oft repeated story, could have been done better and yet, done better than most.

Have to say without reservation that I will watch both Thomas Kretschmann and Jonathan Rhys Meyers in anything they choose. I would watch them sitting and staring at a wall for an hour because I know both are talented enough to make it interesting. Pairing the two and pitting them against a shadowy shared foe should prove interesting and I'm intrigued enough to want to know more. I like the lavishness of the production value and enjoy hearing all the names familiar to the novel, though with different interpretations. The character of Renfield has certainly taken a unique twist, and oh my goodness the shining Lady Jayne definitely has some secrets, doesn't she? Throwing in Thomas Edison, Nikola Tesla and the magnetosphere doesn't hurt. Flashlights didn't exist, eh? Well, do vampires? Take it for what it is, an imaginative derivation of a tale that still enthralls. I for one will keep watching, and probably re-watching to catch what I miss.

Some reviewers obviously disliked this show. Yes, there is a lot of historical sloppiness such as flashlights before the dry cell and incandescent electric bulb were invented (Google "history of flashlight"), or the use of dry ice at the opera (dry ice was invented, but not in widespread use as their was no commercial manufacturing or distribution yet), how Jonathan Rhys Myers (Dracula) can mimic an American accent (presumably without having been there) are all flaws, however these nuances shouldn't ruin the total viewing experience, and I don't think they did.

This show is a completely new approach to the Dracula story--it would seem the only thing in common with previous versions is that Dracula is a powerful vampire who shuns daylight. Other than that, pretty much everything about the story seems to be original. There are familiar characters like Renfield and Van Helsing, however in this story they are completely different than in past depictions, with totally different motives and purpose in Dracula's life.

I'll give it a couple of more episodes to see if it thumbs up or down, but it wasn't too bad for a series premiere, just a little sloppy.

UPDATE: Episode 2 Well despite the rant trying to say my facts are wrong and the writer's are correct (just Google to see for yourself), Episode 2 came forward with the same sloppiness. The storyline carried on, but the story is already getting tired. Same old Dracula where for some reason, he kills in the middle of the street, makes a bloody mess, then looks up and growls before continuing his meal. Grrrr?

An actress uses a quotation written in 2008, "The Devil you know...." Time travel? The fencing scene has the actors wearing modern, lightweight fencing masks and modern form-fitting suits... These consistent flaws aside, its been revealed (by obviously a writer of the show) that Dracula's American accent will be explained, as prequel episodes are forthcoming.

I don't care if there is inaccurate things about this show. Or that it does not follow the typical lore of what a vamp can do etc. It is dark, it is engrossing, you feel the underlining essence of foreboding evil. Old Dracula didn't hate what he was, didn't care whom he killed. The new one is not far from that. But he wants to be a mortal man again. To have the life he had stolen when they killed his wife. But with Mina, whom he feels is his wife reborn. He doesn't just want to whisk her away as his vampire bride to Transylvania. The show is such a surprise. The cast of characters interwoven and so different from Stoker's story. Each episode doesn't rap up the story in a neat little bow by hour's end. It continues, pulling you in each time. It is a cinematic journey. I have to remind myself it's a TV show not an ongoing movie. Watch from the start or you will be lost. The lead becomes his character. Not just acts it.