Product Description

The official sequel to Bram Stoker's classic novel Dracula, written by his direct descendent and endorsed by the Stoker family. The story begins in 1912, twenty-five years after the events described in the original novel. Dr. Jack Seward, now a disgraced morphine addict, hunts vampires across Europe with the help of a mysterious benefactor. Meanwhile, Quincey Harker, the grown son of Jonathan and Mina, leaves law school to pursue a career in stage at London's famous Lyceum Theatre. The production of Dracula at the Lyceum, directed and produced by Bram Stoker, has recently lost its star. Luckily, Quincey knows how to contact the famed Hungarian actor Basarab, who agrees to take the lead role. Quincey soon discovers that the play features his parents and their former friends as characters, and seems to reveal much about the terrible secrets he's always suspected them of harbouring. But, before he can confront them, Jonathan Harker is found murdered. The writers were able to access Bram Stoker's hand-written notes and have included in their story characters and plot threads that had been excised by the publisher from the original printing over a century ago. Dracula is one of the most recognized fictional characters in the world, having spawned dozens of multi-media spin-offs. The Un-Dead is the first Dracula story to enjoy the full support of the Stoker estate since the original 1931 movie starring Bela Lugosi.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #10376 in Books
• Published on: 2009-09-24
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 424 pages

About the Author
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. Ian Holt studied at New York University's Tisch School of the Arts before becoming a renowned screen writer.

Customer Reviews

"Official" sequel? Yes, to Forrest Gump.
This book is so frustrating. The first sequel licensed by the Stoker estate should be so much better than this, and somewhere is a decent story (which I shall go into with spoilers in a while).

Dracula isn't dead. Fine. That's the point of the book. There have been film sequels after sequels and we all know that vampires can be tricky to make sure they are finally dead. The main protagonist of this book however is Elizabeth Bathory, the notorious Hungarian Countess famed for bathing in the blood of local virgins. Presumably other virgins just wouldn't do.

Set 25 years after the events in Dracula she is hunting down the group of heroes (as they lazily become known and CONSTANTLY referred to as such by Holt - see Dan Brown and the Sacred Feminine for an example) who 'killed' Dracula. Now the treatment of said heroes is one of the most interesting aspects of the book. What happens after you have saved the world? What happens after your wife gets jiggy with a man who is 500 years older than you and has the experience to match?

Seward is a drug addled wreck, Holmwood is in denial and has developed a suicidal streak, Jonathan and Mina are together only for the sake of their son, and Van Helsing has become a pastiche of a Dutchman. Crazshy.

Holt seems caught between writing in Victorian and modern day language - both of which are stymied by his actual ability to write a story. Very much like a child, he writes in poor prose - akin to stories at school (and then we did this and then we went there). Simply the story doesn't flow. I don't blame Holt for this. He is a self-confessed Dracula-nerd, not an author. But to allow him this opportunity rather than someone who can actually write means he is out of his depth very, very quickly.

Taking Dracula as a context and mashing him as is the current trend with Vlad the Impaler, he seeks to transform this vampire into a modern romantic character, rather than the monster he was in Bram Stoker's book. Dracula as an undead hero does not sit well. He is immortal and essentially super-powered and as Holt would have you believe perfect. He gives these powers to two other characters who are equally two dimensional and just loses the non-existent plot. There is no dilemma, no threat and no real lurking presence of evil as in the first book. It is a cnfused mess of poor dialogue, juvenile characterisation, little geographical realism, poor simile and a lack of care.

Now I never expected the grreatest story in the world, but I expected more. Slow moving, hampered by unlikelly dialogue and determined to have a cliffhanger every four or five pages, this is so disappointing. Filling the book with obvious references to characters and actors associated with the Dracula mythos, as well as cramming in any celebs of the time gives a ridiculous post-modern feel to the tale. It would seem that every corner Dracula or his groupies turned, they would bump into someone famous or infamous.

But the biggest crime of all is committed by the Stoker estate. Allowing ideas to be flung at the plot randomly (as with the big, and incredibly obvious secret at the end), and actually letting someone essentially overwrite the original and discount over one-hundred years of history smacks of desperation for cash and the American need of a franchise to rival Ann Rice.

This is poorly researched (Whitby is not next to London...ditto Exeter), poorly thought out and disrepectful to the original. It is a poor sequel, to the Coppola film. To be fair there have been poor sequels before ( and there will be after - offical or otherwise), but they have never diminished the original text as this threatens to do.

Stoker (Bram) would be turning in his grave. Or trying to get out and kill his relatives.

The other one will be counting his cash and not giving a damn.

"Dead Grim"
I had great hopes for this book as I love the original Dracula story. However, this book is a real let down. The plot is muddled, the characters feeble & unlikeable, & the writing & language poor & more in keeping with a detective novel. The strength of Bram Stoker's original story was in the gradual build up to the horror of Dracula & some of the descritions made the flesh creep. There was none of that in this novel ---- it was full on blood & guts, with a bit of lesbian sex thrown in! According to the authors, Dracula is a pretty good guy, and on the side of God (or vice versa). To anyone thinking of purchasing this book, my advice would be ---- don't!

If you loved the Da Vinci Code, you might like this ...
Co-written by Bram Stoker's great-grandnephew and a vampire expert, this official sequel tries to shoehorn in every single bit of vampire lore into its length, moving the action on into 1912, 25 years after the original novel ends. Someone is after the survivors of the original band of heroes who 'killed' Dracula and is picking them off one by one - it appears to be another evil historical figure - Elizabeth Bathory, another real person who is reputed to have bathed in girls blood, or could it be Jack the Ripper(!), or has Dracula risen again from the undead. It's up to Jonathan Harker's wife Mina, and son Quincey to stop them or be killed themselves.

The novel was never sillier than when they put Bram Stoker himself into the plot as a struggling writer trying to put on a ridiculous play of his novel - for a book supposing to put right the injustices done to the Stoker family when they were denied royalties for Dracula in the USA, I couldn't understand this move.
Luckily it was a quick read!