Scan barcode
vixenreader's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
funny
informative
reflective
relaxing
tense
fast-paced
4.75
Written with respect and intrigue to its source material, this non-fiction book is the pinnacle exploration of “Dracula” and its ever-reaching effect on our cultural climate, even to this day.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Cannibalism, Murder, Medical trauma, Alcohol, Cultural appropriation, Death, Alcoholism, Body horror, Blood, Gore, Medical content, Mental illness, Violence, and Xenophobia
Moderate: Toxic friendship, Toxic relationship, Grief, Sexual content, Terminal illness, Death of parent, War, Rape, Child abuse, Child death, Genocide, Injury/Injury detail, Misogyny, Pandemic/Epidemic, Outing, Racism, and Slavery
Minor: Lesbophobia, Kidnapping, Religious bigotry, Car accident, Ableism, Adult/minor relationship, Cancer, Cursing, and Fire/Fire injury
Be aware that this book goes into depth about the financial disagreements and copyrights laws with Florence Stoker and the original text. Plus there are mentions of sexually-transmitted diseases, repression, and loveless marriages.biblio_lore's review
5.0
Invaluable resource for anyone who is interested in the tangled road that this story took to get to the film we know now. This book is extremely thorough in its treatment of the details, full of extra stories that really make it a treat for any fan of Dracula and the Universal Monsters.
assimbya's review
5.0
This is an excellent, excellent book, for either those interested in the Dracula story and the various forms that it's taken, those interested in the history of horror films, or those who just like vampires. It's wonderfully designed - a gorgeous still from the 1931 Bela Lugosi movie graces the first page - eliminating at the onset most of the danger that this book could fall into painful cheesiness. And Skal writes about the first forty years of the Dracula story with intelligence, wit, and a great deal of passion for the subject matter. This book was both incredibly informative and occasionally made me laugh out loud.
For me, the first chapter was slightly boring - I knew most of the Skal's material on Stoker's inspiration for the novel and its critical and popular reception. But as soon as he reached the play version that catapulted Dracula into being a popular icon, I was riveted. Skal describes in loving detail all he can find out about both the London and Broadway productions of that play, and manages to make not only the anecdotes but also the potentially tiresome financial details engaging and interesting.
When he gets to Murnau's Nosferatu and the 1931 Dracula, the earliest adapatations which many readers will be familiar with, Skal then does something with I applaud greatly - he's not afriad to criticize either of them, even as he acknowledges the dreamlike, symbolism filled world of Nosferatu and Dracula's position as an unquestionably classic film. He points out (and rightfully so) that Murnau's experiments with faced paced film, an attempt to induce a supernatural cast to such mundane moments as Hutter's carriage speeding into the mountains, seem merely laughable in the modern age. And he shows how careless the vast majority of both the screenplay and cinematography of Dracula is, and justifiably mocks the completely inexplicable armadillos in the Count's castle in that same movie.
He also lauds the virtues of the Spanish version of the 1931 Dracula, so much so that I was convinced to see it. He says that, in addition to more satisfactorally resolving Lucy's plotline, that version utilizes the sets far more effectively, and chooses to take far more dramatic shots at many points. I hadn't heard anyone quite this enthusiastic about this version before, and it's quite interesting.
This book did disappoint me, however, in its rather limited scope, though it's a testament to how good it was that I wanted to read more. Such differing eras and interpertations as the Hammer films, Werner Herzog's Nosferatu, the Frank Langella Dracula, and Bram Stoker's Dracula, were all glossed over in one quick chapter that said little more than "and Count Dracula continues to be a powerful image today," which is such a common statement in any essay on Dracula as to be essentially meaningless.
That said, this was a wonderful book, especially for someone who doesn't quite fit into either the 'horror movie buff' or 'Victorian literary critic searching for metaphors of xenophobia/homosexuality/imperialism/Catholicism vs. Protestatism/etc.' categories of Dracula fan, and likes to criticize the movie versions without completely disregarding them.
For me, the first chapter was slightly boring - I knew most of the Skal's material on Stoker's inspiration for the novel and its critical and popular reception. But as soon as he reached the play version that catapulted Dracula into being a popular icon, I was riveted. Skal describes in loving detail all he can find out about both the London and Broadway productions of that play, and manages to make not only the anecdotes but also the potentially tiresome financial details engaging and interesting.
When he gets to Murnau's Nosferatu and the 1931 Dracula, the earliest adapatations which many readers will be familiar with, Skal then does something with I applaud greatly - he's not afriad to criticize either of them, even as he acknowledges the dreamlike, symbolism filled world of Nosferatu and Dracula's position as an unquestionably classic film. He points out (and rightfully so) that Murnau's experiments with faced paced film, an attempt to induce a supernatural cast to such mundane moments as Hutter's carriage speeding into the mountains, seem merely laughable in the modern age. And he shows how careless the vast majority of both the screenplay and cinematography of Dracula is, and justifiably mocks the completely inexplicable armadillos in the Count's castle in that same movie.
He also lauds the virtues of the Spanish version of the 1931 Dracula, so much so that I was convinced to see it. He says that, in addition to more satisfactorally resolving Lucy's plotline, that version utilizes the sets far more effectively, and chooses to take far more dramatic shots at many points. I hadn't heard anyone quite this enthusiastic about this version before, and it's quite interesting.
This book did disappoint me, however, in its rather limited scope, though it's a testament to how good it was that I wanted to read more. Such differing eras and interpertations as the Hammer films, Werner Herzog's Nosferatu, the Frank Langella Dracula, and Bram Stoker's Dracula, were all glossed over in one quick chapter that said little more than "and Count Dracula continues to be a powerful image today," which is such a common statement in any essay on Dracula as to be essentially meaningless.
That said, this was a wonderful book, especially for someone who doesn't quite fit into either the 'horror movie buff' or 'Victorian literary critic searching for metaphors of xenophobia/homosexuality/imperialism/Catholicism vs. Protestatism/etc.' categories of Dracula fan, and likes to criticize the movie versions without completely disregarding them.
More...