Scan barcode
misosoupp31's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.25
This was a great read! The parts with Lucy did drag quite a bit, and it seemed like they were always so slow to do things, but it was actually way spookier and more mysterious than I thought it would be. I really liked Mina
radnails's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
4.75
fandomnerd05's review against another edition
challenging
dark
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
jackson_kn64's review against another edition
4.0
I had this book on my to-read list for far too long (as is usually the case). As many others here have said, the Dracula world has been referenced so many times in media (through various movie spin-offs and fan fiction). So much so, that it is almost hard to justify going back and reading the original source material (we’re getting plenty of Dracula media, why bother?). At least, that was kind of my thinking prior to finally picking this book up.
I finally decided that it was time I’d commit to this gothic horror epic, and I am so glad I did so. For the most part, the main characters are likeable, although I do feel that certain characters were more-or-less just plot devices. The main selling point of this novel, though, is the atmosphere it creates. Stoker’s depiction of Transylvania is truly unsettling and immensely compelling, especially in the opening 100 pages-or-so.
This is a terrific book, and quite accessible to the modern reader (I would argue, even more so than something like Wuthering Heights). So, if you’re looking for a dark action/horror novel, then this one is worth a look.
I finally decided that it was time I’d commit to this gothic horror epic, and I am so glad I did so. For the most part, the main characters are likeable, although I do feel that certain characters were more-or-less just plot devices. The main selling point of this novel, though, is the atmosphere it creates. Stoker’s depiction of Transylvania is truly unsettling and immensely compelling, especially in the opening 100 pages-or-so.
This is a terrific book, and quite accessible to the modern reader (I would argue, even more so than something like Wuthering Heights). So, if you’re looking for a dark action/horror novel, then this one is worth a look.
gildie's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
macliffe's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
hopeful
inspiring
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
One of my favorite books of all time. It’s technically horror I suppose but I see it more as a hopeful story about good winning over evil.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Murder, Violence, Stalking, Gore, and Blood
Moderate: Misogyny and Body horror
Minor: Antisemitism and Child death
c3lest1_sun's review against another edition
4.0
take a shot every time the world “voluptuous” is used to describe the women in this book (jk don’t get alcohol poisoning)
ok but in actuality, this book is pretty good, and earns its iconicity. i think i do agree with the general masses when they say the first third is the best and it drags for the rest of the book. i wish we could have seen more content similar to the first third, because the suspense and thrill was really well crafted, and developed the count for more interestingly than the rest of the book.
would just like to say that bram stoker’s aesthetic language, especially when describing the fog, is incredible. it’s so vivid and haunting — i love it.
ok but in actuality, this book is pretty good, and earns its iconicity. i think i do agree with the general masses when they say the first third is the best and it drags for the rest of the book. i wish we could have seen more content similar to the first third, because the suspense and thrill was really well crafted, and developed the count for more interestingly than the rest of the book.
would just like to say that bram stoker’s aesthetic language, especially when describing the fog, is incredible. it’s so vivid and haunting — i love it.
carriedoodledoo's review against another edition
2.0
You know what? It was okay. Dramatic Victorian pop lit, and you can tell its written by a guy and not a girl because there's no descriptions of what everybody is wearing.
I see why it got to be a horror classic--the gothic drama, the sexy vampires, the spooooooookiness. But it's not the best. Big long novel (the whole thing is epistlatory!) and the final "battle" with the Big Bad, who's supposed to be really smart and battle-honed and have the tactical edge, takes place REALLY anticlimactically in the last couple pages. Then Bram Stoker adds insult to injury with the little Victorian postlogue.
PLUS you have to deal with Stoker's weird writing of Van Helsing's voice (is that really how Dutch people talk?) and the repeated "oh no! Lucy needs blood! Quick! Nearest man! Roll up your sleeve!" AND Van Helsing somehow having an unlimited supply of consecrated host for vampire-fighting. 1) its like the Hollywood 16-shooter, and 2) WHAT PRIEST would EVER hand over a CONSECRATED HOST to SOME GUY who said "yeah i'm gonna smash it in tiny bits and make a paste and seal up tombs with it". NOBODY thought an ACTUAL priest should be doing ANY of this?? GAH
So yeah. Like, 4 stars for concept, 2 for execution, keeping it at 2 just because while its a fun piece of Victorian "oooooo spooky" it is so trashy.
Side Note: They make mention of Count Dracula having attended "the Scholomance", which made me aware that the term wasn't made up by Naomi Novik. Now I feel dumb. Fabled school of black magic, run by the Devil. Ew.
I see why it got to be a horror classic--the gothic drama, the sexy vampires, the spooooooookiness. But it's not the best. Big long novel (the whole thing is epistlatory!) and the final "battle" with the Big Bad, who's supposed to be really smart and battle-honed and have the tactical edge, takes place REALLY anticlimactically in the last couple pages. Then Bram Stoker adds insult to injury with the little Victorian postlogue.
PLUS you have to deal with Stoker's weird writing of Van Helsing's voice (is that really how Dutch people talk?) and the repeated "oh no! Lucy needs blood! Quick! Nearest man! Roll up your sleeve!" AND Van Helsing somehow having an unlimited supply of consecrated host for vampire-fighting. 1) its like the Hollywood 16-shooter, and 2) WHAT PRIEST would EVER hand over a CONSECRATED HOST to SOME GUY who said "yeah i'm gonna smash it in tiny bits and make a paste and seal up tombs with it". NOBODY thought an ACTUAL priest should be doing ANY of this?? GAH
So yeah. Like, 4 stars for concept, 2 for execution, keeping it at 2 just because while its a fun piece of Victorian "oooooo spooky" it is so trashy.
Side Note: They make mention of Count Dracula having attended "the Scholomance", which made me aware that the term wasn't made up by Naomi Novik. Now I feel dumb. Fabled school of black magic, run by the Devil. Ew.