3/5 Horribly miscast, and lackluster production
  by z hayes (plano,texas)
I love the novel, and have watched just about every screen adaptation there is to watch. My favorites of the screen Draculas - Bela Lugosi, Christopher Lee, and Frank Langella. It's difficult to find a truly faithful adaptation of "Dracula" in the movies, and over the years the story has undergone all sorts of transformations. This latest treatment by the BBC takes a very different approach to the classic vampire tale. Purists will revile it, but I found it watchable. The story here explores the themes of moral corruption, and repressed sexuality as represented in Victorian England. An aristocrat, Lord Holmwood (Dan Stevens who appeared as Edward Ferrars in the 2008 BBC adaptation of Sense and Sensibility) finds himself in torment over the fact that he has inherited syphilis from his parents. He is also engaged to the attractive Lucy Westenra (Sophia Myles) who is clueless about her fiance's condition. When Holmwood finds a secret occult society that is willing to help him cure his blood disease(at a price of course), he dispatches solicitor Jonathan Harker (Rafe Spall) to Transylvania to settle some legalities with a certain Count Dracula. Jonathan also happens to be the fiance of Mina Murray (Stephanie Leonidas), Lucy's best friend.

Well, Dracula (a horribly miscast Marc Warren) eventually makes his way to England, and makes the acquaintance of both Mina and Lucy, much to Holmwood's displeasure and eventual horror. Things start to deteriorate at a rapid pace from here onwards, and it's left to Holmwood, together with Van Helsing and Dr. John Seward (Tom Burke, who is the real hero here) to put an end to Dracula.

The problems with this adaptation are many - the liberties taken with the novel being one. The Dracula in this adaptation is able to walk in daylight, Van Helsing is reduced to a less than dignified raving old man, and the various central characters in the original source are all playing rather different, or diminished roles. The occult society is portrayed as being the group responsible for introducing Dracula to Holmwood, but not much explanation is given as to how this society came to make the acquaintance of Dracula. The relationship between Renfield and Dracula in the original material was much more credibly drawn than this tenuous connection.

Secondly, I felt that the role of Dracula as played by Marc Warren to be horribly miscast. He is the worst Dracula I've ever seen on screen - he's nothing but a predator and bloodsucker here, pure and simple. There is not much depth to his character, and part of that could lie with the length of this production, a mere 90 minutes. Not much time to fully explore the richness of this Gothic horror story. Both the female leads were rather disappointing, though Sophia Myles' Lucy did a good job as the sexually deprived wife, whilst Mina was reduced to playing a melancholic and grieving lover which got stale after a while. The other male leads were also rather ho-hum, and the most disappointing of all was the role of Abraham Van Helsing. David Suchet is a talented actor and he was reduced to the role of an ineffectual old man here, very sad indeed (especially when one considers how the late horror great Peter Cushing played this role - with such dignity and composure).

On the whole, this adaptation of "Dracula" merits a watch if only to draw comparisons with the other adaptations out there, but I would have to say that it was quite an underwhelming and dissatisfying experience.

1/5 What were they thinking?
  by Jane Austen fan (Denton, TX)
This was just plain awful! Mina is a very strong female character in the novel, not the wimp portrayed in this production. There is a perfectly good plot in Bram Stoker's book. No need to rewrite the story, especially in such a bad way. Shame on you, Masterpiece Theatre! I was already mad at you for the fiasco which was the latest production of Jane Eyre.

5/5 A FRESH, UNIQUE TAKE ON THE VAMPIRE MYTH!
  by MagiSci
This is an excellent interpretation of the Dracula myth. It's dark, decadent and unusual in that some of the characters are active, knowing participants in the conjuring of the nightmare of the Vampire. It also shatters the perceived perfection of Victorian England as it exposes its dark, "charnel pit like" underbelly; euro-centrism, self righteousness, religious hypocrisy, sexual repression, sexism, racism, etc. Like the vampire Barlow, in Stephen King's excellent book, Salem's Lot, Dracula is invited to London by a cable of nefarious characters (using unholy rites) hoping for personal benefit; they know not what they've done until it's too late. Dracula, learning of London and it's people, is drawn to this rich new feeding ground like a diseased infested flea. If you're interested in a fresh unique adult take on the Vampire myth, this is well worth renting (I own it). My biggest complaint is that the film is not long enough. With more time and prudent care the screenwriter(s)/Director could have easily incorporated the other characters (from Bram Stoker's classic) into the story.

3/5 Dracula
  by Robert C. Marra
This is not the usual Dracula movie from the early 50's. Just a little story type that has added a new perspective to the movie.

4/5 A different take on Dracula!
  by Audrey D. (ON CDA)
I really enjoyed the Masterpiece Theatre's version of Dracula. Sophia Myles as Lucy was quite different from other versions I've seen. Sophia is an exceptional actress and played the role extremely well. As I like vampire stories this one was really quite well done.