Dracula The Un-Dead

Written by Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt

Narrated by Simon Prebble

The great-grandnephew of Bram Stoker, Dacre Stoker collaborates with Dracula historian Ian Holt to pen the first Stoker-family-supported sequel to the 1897 horror classic. Based on Bram Stoker's notes, the legendary story continues 25 years after the events of the original. An evil has once again crept onto the land, this time to hunt down those responsible for Dracula's demise.A quarter of a century after Count Dracula "crumbled into dust," Quincey Harker-the son of Jonathan and Mina Harker-leaves law school to pursue a career on stage, only to stumble upon the troubled production of Dracula, directed and produced by Bram Stoker himself. As the play plunges Quincey into the world of his parents' terrible secrets, death begins to stalk the original band of heroes that defeated Dracula a quarter-century ago. Could it be that the count survived and is now seeking revenge? Or is there another, far more sinister force at work whose relentless purpose is to destroy anything and anyone associated with Dracula, the most notorious vampire of all time?

• Language: English
• Publisher: Recorded Books, Inc.
• Release date: Oct 13, 2009
• ISBN: 9781440763427

Dacre Stoker

Dacre Stoker is the great grand nephew of Dracula author, Bram Stoker. He lives with his wife, Jenne, in South Carolina. The Un-dead is his first novel.

Reviews for Dracula The Un-Dead

[Pamella Chatfield · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I was excited when I learned about this book, and I was not disappointed. The characters were taken in a direction that most Dracula fans didn't expect. As a result I think it ruffled a lot of feathers. Myself? I enjoyed it!

[Brian Steidl · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I enjoyed it and would love to hear the sequel that is hinted at inn the ending.

[flourgirl49 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

Gruesome, lurid and violent are just a few of the words I'd use to describe this book. I just don't think that it was necessary to write a sequel to "Dracula." And the authors appear to have set it up for a sequel to THIS book. Please, no.

[bookhookgeek · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

I wanted to give this book one star for being ridiculous and for reading like a screenplay (not surprising, as one of the authors is a screenwriter). But since reading the authors' notes at the end of the book, I'll reluctantly bump the rating to two stars, since the authors gave acceptable reasons for the direction the story took. Still, I really could have done without the graphic and disgusting violence--a story can be scary without going into details of evisceration and decapitation!

As a side note, I noticed several typos throughout the text, such as "pour" instead of "poor" and "steal" rather than "steel"--don't always believe that a computer spell-check is correct!

[hopeevey · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

I can't believe I accidentally gave this tripe 4 stars. Urg. Think about the worst kind of fan fiction out there, with a veneer of decent writing. Make it novel length. Then don't bother reading this book.

[e2d2-1 · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

This was book was about two hundred pages too long. Poorly written and a shameful "sequel" to one of my all tube favorite novels.

[oraclejenn · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

If you love the original and don't want to see a lot of mixture of real life events with fiction (because even if parts of Dracula are based on real people, it's still a made up story), then don't read this book.

If you've missed the characters, want to know what they possibly could have gotten up to and don't mind seeing them completely different than you remember them, then this is the book for you.

[rosa.mill · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I really liked this book, it had a quick pace that kept me interested. I loved the inclusion of historical details and people, including Bram Stoker himself. The addition of Elizabeth Bathory to the cast of villains is a great choice; the descriptions of her life help humanize and let the reader see how she became so twisted. I don't want to give too much away so I will only say that it is very interesting to see how the lives of all of the heroes from the original Dracula turn out, and how those experiences have affected each of them.

[carl_alves_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I’m always a little wary when people try to mess with a classic, even moreso when the novel is a direct sequel to it. However, the fact that it is written by Bram Stoker’s great-grandnephew and a Dracula historian lend it a great deal of credibility. The novel is set in 1912, a quarter of a century after Van Helsing and his “band of heroes” defeated Dracula. Front and center in this novel is Quincey Harker, the son of Mina and Jonathan Harker. His parents have kept him in the dark regarding their family history as it pertains to Dracula. When members of the band of heroes start to die off, Mina, who has not aged in the past twenty-five years, realizes that she has to reveal the family history to her son, who has turned away from the career of a lawyer that his father has plotted for him and aspires to be an actor under the tutelage of the great Basarab (who isn’t exactly who he seems to be). The true villain in the novel is revealed not to be Dracula but Countess Bathory, a sixteenth century vampire related to Dracula who is wreaking her revenge on God and humanity. Jonathan and the remaining heroes must once again face the evil that exists, but don’t necessarily know who the villains are.This was a really enjoyable novel in a lot of ways. It helped that the characters were familiar, with the exception of Jonathan. The novel is exceptionally well-written and professional. There is a logical flow to the progression from the original novel to the sequel. The plot itself was very strong. Having said that, I found a couple of the things that were implemented in here a bit jarring, such as the appearance of Bram Stoker as a character (although this was sufficiently explained) and the transformation of Van Helsing’s character. I liked the inclusion of real-life historical figures into the novel and how they incorporated events like the Jack the Ripper murders into the story. The part with the Titanic at the end was a bit much for me, but for the most part this was well-handled. This novel was definitely a worthy successor to the original, one that I’m sure Bram Stoker would be proud of.Carl Alves - author of Blood Street

[christineellei · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I was not going to read this book, but then a friend loaned it to me and I couldn’t resist. It is the only “Stoker family authorized sequel” to the original Dracula. The book was very interesting with a few original hypotheses about current events in the late 19th century. However, they tampered a little too much with the original “character” of Dracula for my personal taste. As much as I enjoy the various takes on the vampire lore (everything from Anne Rice to Sookie Stackhouse), and as much as I liked the read I am sorry I read it.

[vincentdarlage · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

Wow. I had such high hopes for this one. They turned vampires (and Mina) into super-heroes (I hate super-hero vampires). It had interesting moments (such as including Bram Stoker in the novel as a character, along with the characters from the original Dracula), and had Elizabeth Bathory as a vampire... but, wow. Victorian-age superheroes vs. supervillains. Not at all what I wanted or expected.

[adpaton · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

Oh dear, this book was really dreadful, amateurish and full of anachronisms. Mina Harker was seduced by Dracula [who is actually a goodie, regarding himself as a warrior for Christ]] and he awakened passions in her that the weakling and soon-to-be alcoholic Jonathan Harker could never hope to emulate with his vanilla love making. Jack Seward is a morphine addict, Lord Godalming never recovers from his broken heart, Van Helsing is not the kindly patriarchal saint we imagined him, and Mina's son [now 25] is a naive and judgmental prig. A thoroughly unlikable set of characters.Add the villainous Elizabeth Bathory to the mix and oh dear - Bram Stoker is surely spinning in his grave...

[r0bin_1 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

I met Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt at BookExpo and got an autographed ARC copy of this book for free. That's the good news -- I got it for free. I liked Dacre Stoker (notice how I didn't mention Ian Holt...) and I wanted to like his book but I was disappointed. I was hoping for more Dracula and less Elizabeth Bathory and Jack the Ripper. Actually, there were about 400 characters in the book and the game of recognizing them started distracting me from the plot. Besides for characters from the original book, Bram Stoker was a character in the book plus lots of the real people that he associated with as well as many characters with the names of actors who have played Dracula. For example, there was a character in the book named Langella. There were some good action scenes and Ian Holt probably hopes that it will make a great movie.

Two stars was an act of charity because Dacre Stoker seems like such a nice guy.

[odinblindeye · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Unfortunately, not as good as the original. It went a little too "we could make this into a movie!" for me at points, focusing more on action than actual horror. As well, the horror was more gore than horror most of the time. Still a good book, but I guess I was hoping for something more...

[marysneedle · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I really liked how the author tied some historic events into the story and thought it was very creative.It was also a quick read.

[doingdewey · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

This book wasn’t at all what I expected based on the fact that it’s written by Bram’s great grand-nephew and a Dracula historian. They make some changes in the way events from the first book “really” happened and the writing is very Dan Brown – passably well written, very exciting, and with more sex and violence in the chapter than in all of the original. I anticipated something a little more in the style of the first book. They do start with a letter, which is a bit of a homage to the first book, and there is also a very fun guest appearance by Bram Stoker. In fact, the inclusion of real events from Bram Stoker’s life and the inclusion of several other famous historical characters was one of my favorite parts of this book. They ended up being what I consider an acceptable justification for the changes they made in the events of the original.After I forgave the authors for messing with the original, I began to really enjoy what they’d done with it. They spell out for you the fact the vampires arouse sexual urges and that men hate and fear them for creating sexually independent women out of their demure Victorian wives. By retaining those things, and in their portrayal of the characters from the first book, I think they stay very true to Bram Stoker’s intent. Better still, they update things so that independent women aren’t quite so clearly associated with evil for the reader. They could learn from the original’s understatedness (the excessive violence is more than I would like) but this was definitely a good, solid adventure…. until the ending. I won’t say too much to avoid spoilers, but for me to really love a book with so much in it that was depressing, it needed a happier ending.

[senorag163 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Excellent book! I love the developement of our old friends and the way Dracula was portrayed! I have always loved Dracula and thought there was more to him then the evil that meets the eye! Ending definately left it open for some more!

[saramllr · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

I certainly don't think Bram Stoker would approve of this "sequel" to his original Dracula novel. This book is cliched and cheesy as hell. It was still entertaining, but don't expect any literary masterpiece here.

[renz0808 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

I always like to read sequels and spin-offs of my favorite popular works of fiction, so I was excited to get this one because it is co-written by someone in Stoker's family and I thouught it would be interesting to get the family perspective and be an excellent addition to the Dracula story. It started off well and I thought that the original idea was good, it really has a lot of promise but somewhere in the writing, the execution of the plot goes all wrong. It just doesn't flow well and I felt the writing could have been much better. There was some original ideas like the bringing in Countess Bathory as a villian and including all of the original characters and what they have become over time. I even thought including the Jack the Ripper theme had potential but it just never came together. Also, I made the mistake of re-reading the original before reading this one and I found the characters in the spin-off to be more flawed, one dimensional and flat. I was terribly disappointed in this book considering it could have been great.

[xenchu · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

This book was a movie script with all the dramatic visual effects of a movie. And, in keeping with modern tastes, one of the vampires is a good guy. The book was written by a relative of Bram Stoker and a screenwriter. It seems to me that the screenwriter had much the greater input. Expect this one on the big screen someday if the authors can make a good deal.I cannot in all conscience recommend this book but I won't trash it either. Read it and make up your own mind.

[flowerfairy_1 · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

WoW! If this book had been any cheesier, I could have thrown it on a pizza and baked it! Every cliche imaginable, every melodramatic, cheese filled moment you can possibly imagine was thrown into this book. Had such very high hopes. This first few chapters were good and promising. And then it turned into something worse than the worst B movie I've ever seen.

[slysionnach_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

I wanted to like this book. Oh, you have no idea how badly I wanted to like this book. And I do, sort of, kind of, in a funny way.I think I would like it if it was a movie and all the names were changed. Because that's what it read like: a movie. I could see each scene in my mind, the dramatic moments, the cinematic special effects... But to me, that wasn't what the original Dracula was about to me.The characters, the original Band of Heroes, have fallen onto hard times. This is completely understandable; they went and fought a monster that shouldn't exist and had to kill a dearly beloved friend. I can see how the authors decided to make certain characters have certain vices. But some of them seemed to have just changed fundamentally. I don't like what they did with Mina (but then again, after reading the original novel, I didn't think there was that separate romantic interest there. Coppola's movie was the first time I saw that and I did a double-take). Or with her husband, Jonathan. I think the biggest insult was what they did to Van Helsing and Dracula himself. I could never see the expert vampire hunter succumbing to what he did. It just doesn't seem right, the way his story ended. I would have rather him have a heart attack.And I believe I read it in a review here, they did Twilight-ify Count/Prince Dracula. The impression I got of him in the original novel was completely overturned for this dramatic antihero who really never meant to do any harm that wasn't justified. He lost everything about him that made him effectively scary and it was replaced with something I could see girls swooning over (I rather liked swooning over the dark scary one, thanks ;)). And if his origins were supposed to be secret, then the authors failed. As well as their big "shocking secret" at the end.I found the book was just without the subtle and gothic-y horror that made Dracula so famous. It took it down an action-packed, romantic, hyped up novel that really, to me, reads like it was written to go straight into film, sometimes being too sparse. It's not that it wasn't worth reading - I did finish in a day - but it was not what I think I expected (nor what a lot of Dracula-fans did).

[tonyaj_62 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

Started out interestingly enough, but then turned into "A World of No".

[skauternator · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Ironically, I found it difficult to finish this book, which is the same issue I had with the original. Although, with this one, I really didn't care what happened at the end. I just wanted to finish it so I had a date to put in my LibraryThing book details.

[thejohnsmith · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This was a thoroughly entertaining novel. Well written, good plot, interesting characters - quite a page turner. The story takes place several years after the events of the original Dracula and introduces Elizabeth Bathory, a truly evil vampire. Dracula is somewhat re-written from the original - someone has suggested he's been 'twighlighted' and that's a fair assessment. That didn't detract from the enjoyment of the story for me though. Well worth reading.

[kmaziarz_4 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

In this authorized sequel to Bram Stoker’s classic Dracula, his great-grandnephew teams with a Dracula scholar to present the surviving members of the band of heroes 25 years after their original bloody battle. Dr. Jack Seward has descended into penury and opium addiction. Arthur Holmwood has retreated from the public eye, still mourning his lost love, Lucy. Mina Harker, due to her ingestion of Dracula’s blood, has hardly aged a day and has thrown herself into raising son Quincy and maintaining the appearance of a respectable lady and wife. Jonathan Harker, tormented by his wife’s agelessness—a constant proof of her infidelity—is a drunkard and has turned mean. Dr. Van Helsing has aged greatly, his weak heart constantly on the edge of stopping entirely. Bram Stoker, too, is a character in this novel. Here, Stoker is presented as an aging theatre owner with literary ambitions who took the true story of the band of heroes—told to him over drinks in a bar by one of the survivors—and turned it into an unsuccessful penny dreadful Gothic novel and is now attempting a dramatic adaptation for the stage. Young Quincy Harker, who has theatrical ambitions of his own, manages to enlist famous Romanian actor Basarab for the lead role. But when members of the original band of heroes begin dying violent, bloody deaths, the survivors fear that Dracula survived their attack after all and is out for revenge. But the true evil stalking them…the blood Countess Elizabeth Bathory…is more terrifying than the heroes could ever imagine. Though the authors claim to have based their sequel upon Bram Stoker’s notes and papers, this is not the Dracula you remember. Now explicitly connected to the historical Prince Vlad Drakul, the character, while still an undead blood-sucking vampire, does not consider himself to be evil or soulless; but to be a warrior for God and protector of Christendom…a Knight in the Order of the Dragon, as was the historical Drakul. The motives of many of the character’s actions in the original novel are here revised, seen from the other side of the coin. His fangs have not been pulled, but he is not the monster Bram Stoker originally wrote. Elizabeth Bathory, based upon the historical Countess said to have bathed in the blood of virgin girls to maintain her youthfulness, fulfills that role—though her motives in hunting down the band seem flimsy at best and the addition of her lesbianism to the plot seems forced and sensationalist. No more than competently written, with scenes of explicit sexuality and violence, the novel is an interesting addition to Dracula lore…though it does not compare at all favorably to the original. None of the characters are particularly likable (with Quincy Harker himself being the most spineless and callow of the lot) and the inclusion of plots dealing with the Jack the Ripper murders and a highly unsatisfying ending complete the picture of a novel trying far too hard to please a modern audience and forgetting what made the original great.

[joles_3 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I began reading this book rather skeptically and was pleasantly surprised. The characters remain mostly the same. While the plot seemed a leap at first, it settled in and made sense. The authors have taken a great deal of time to research the background. (While some deem this "name-dropping" situations like Bram Stoker writing for the Lyceum Theatre and having a connection to Henry Irving are completely true.)The book was highly enjoyable.

[chicamimi · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

This book was enjoyable. It added a nice bit of history of another famous "vampire" in Elizabeth Bathory, but I did take some issues with the way Dracula came to be portrayed in this novel. It's like they Twilightified him, so that he was just another misunderstood vampire. What?It was a fun read though and it was an interesting look at how the characters of the novel dealt with things and the way normal people dealt with the supernatural.

[bibgirl · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

I really hate to do this, be really negative about any book especially one I haven't finished but I just dont have anything positive to say about this. It may be the worst book I have ever read. It is badly written, badly plotted, the dialogue is dreadful and the book is incredibly tedious. It is just such a chore to read I almost left it on the train but I would have felt bad if someone else had found it and tried to read it.The plot if it can be called that follows on 25 years after the defeat of Dracula. It deals with the original group of characters who have carried on with theire lives but all bearing the emotional scars from the original encounter. Their lives are described in a series of boring overly long flashbacks, the sole purpose of which seems to be to pad the book out. The Harkers & co. are being hunted down one by one by a new evil and this is where any attempt at a coherent plot ends.It introduces Elizabeth Bathory as a female lesbian vampire, has Bram Stoker as a theatre owner and author of a play Dracula, name drops anyone and everyone from the time period from the actors in the play to the inspector who investigated Jack the Ripper and who is convinced that the new victims mean Jack is back and he is indeed Van Helsing, ( one of the original prime suspects in the case - who knew? ) aided and abetted by his Dracula co - conspirators. Is Dracula himself back or are Bathory and her companions the only vampires, who knows, 175 pages and I don't think I can carry on much longer to try to find out. It is driving me to house cleaning to avoid reading it. If anyone else is unfortunate enough to find that they have chosen this book to read perhaps if they make it to the end they will let me know.

[jthierer_1 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

I was really excited to read this book because I love the original Dracula novel. Unfortunately, this book does not live up to its predecessor. The authors state in their notes at the end of the book that they made some of the changes they made to appeal to fans of the film who have never read the book. This was reinforced by the fact that Ian Holt originally conceived of the book as a screenplay. While I might have been more forgiving of some of these changes in a movie sequel, I was frustrated by them in a book sequel. I wanted a sequel that told a new and exciting story but stayed true to the spirit of the original. Instead, I got a sensationalistic, slightly sex-obsessed "modern" vampire novel using the same character names as Bram Stoker. Its a shame they wasted such a good opportunity.