Search
I loved this edition of Dracula. Though I have not finished the novel itself, I have friends who have and they assured me that this does not leave much out.
The story itself was quite interesting. As one of the first full vampire novels, I can see how others have drawn inspiration from this book.
There were parts that I was not a fan of, that felt rushed, but as these are journal entries and letters, there would not be the drawn out narratives that would be there were it someone's novel.
The art was very well done. I loved the color uses and the playing with shadows to make it seem more foreboding. It was beautiful.
That being said, in this particular edition, some of the text was difficult to see. Because the artists were differentiating the writers by color and font, this made some of the combinations difficult to read. In particular, I found it difficult to read Mina's writing. Since it was pink on pink with a cursive type font, everything looked jumbled together and was just, in general, difficult to read.
That is the main reason I gave it two stars off, though I actually give this book a 3.5. I liked the story and I am excited to actually pick up and read the full novel, hopefully soon, to see if I can mark the differences between the two.
The story itself was quite interesting. As one of the first full vampire novels, I can see how others have drawn inspiration from this book.
There were parts that I was not a fan of, that felt rushed, but as these are journal entries and letters, there would not be the drawn out narratives that would be there were it someone's novel.
The art was very well done. I loved the color uses and the playing with shadows to make it seem more foreboding. It was beautiful.
That being said, in this particular edition, some of the text was difficult to see. Because the artists were differentiating the writers by color and font, this made some of the combinations difficult to read. In particular, I found it difficult to read Mina's writing. Since it was pink on pink with a cursive type font, everything looked jumbled together and was just, in general, difficult to read.
That is the main reason I gave it two stars off, though I actually give this book a 3.5. I liked the story and I am excited to actually pick up and read the full novel, hopefully soon, to see if I can mark the differences between the two.
Top 80 Classic Books - The free collection of the 80 best classics of all the time
Book and Travel
App
This amazing app contains the top 80 classic books, as proposed by one hundred writers from...
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Dracula (English) (1931) in Movies
Mar 7, 2019
Where it all began...
Contains spoilers, click to show
The year was 1931: Two years after the success of The Jazz Singer and the final introduction of sound movies into the mainstream, sound was still revolutionising the industry. But in 1931, a bit like 3D now, there was still much confusion over to how make films, with directors, producers and actors alike, were still moving over from the suddenly dated silent era, with varying success.
Tod Browning was a man who would unfortunately find little success in the sound era, but not necessarily because he couldn't move with the times, but because his career was derailed a couple of years later by his disturbing horror pic, Freaks.
Dracula was shot THREE times. One, this one, was the conventional sound version that we all know. An other was shot at night and in Spanish for the benefit of that audience, which the studio supposedly preferred. This was quite common at this time, but little known nowadays. And the third was a straight forward silent version for the many theatres still un-equipped to handle sound.
But the styles of the silent era are all over this film. From the long silent reactions shots and the over acting, especially by Bela Lagosi in the titular role. This was also the adaptation of the stage adaptation of Bram Stoker's chiller, and was faithfully adapted from that source, hence the lack of more complex special effects, with bats on strings and fog machines, over more cinematic effects.
The transformation scenes for example, where the Count morphs from a bat to the undead human occur off-screen, rather than some form of cross fade etc. Is this a choice driven by lack of money? Lack of cinematic ambition of a choice to stick to the stage material? To be honest, I have too little knowledge or experience of Tod Browning's work to suggest a reason, but when all's said and done, it did work.
Let's be honest, this is 80 years old and is not the least bit scary and it is hard not to laugh, but in context, I'm sure it worked well at the time and the story is well conveyed. Lagosi's undead performance is hammy by today's standards but he was somewhat likable. He was very deliberate, slow and the silent era has certainly left its scars, as the subtly of sound performing was yet to take hold.
But this is the sort of film were silent melodramatic acting still worked. This is of course a piece Gothic Horror, the home of melodrama if ever there was one. This is surly a product of its time, both as the industry went through one of it's most dramatic changes, which ended so many careers as well a created so many new ones, but it's also, let's not forget, the first direct adaptation of Bram Stoker's book, besides the 1922 German version, Nosferatu, which changes a fair few details to try to get around the copyright, failing to do so mind, resulting in failed bid to have every copy of the film destroyed.
This is the film that ingrained the image of the Dracula that we know today into popular culture. This was were the Universal horror franchise began. For whatever faults it has by today's standards, it did something right.
Tod Browning was a man who would unfortunately find little success in the sound era, but not necessarily because he couldn't move with the times, but because his career was derailed a couple of years later by his disturbing horror pic, Freaks.
Dracula was shot THREE times. One, this one, was the conventional sound version that we all know. An other was shot at night and in Spanish for the benefit of that audience, which the studio supposedly preferred. This was quite common at this time, but little known nowadays. And the third was a straight forward silent version for the many theatres still un-equipped to handle sound.
But the styles of the silent era are all over this film. From the long silent reactions shots and the over acting, especially by Bela Lagosi in the titular role. This was also the adaptation of the stage adaptation of Bram Stoker's chiller, and was faithfully adapted from that source, hence the lack of more complex special effects, with bats on strings and fog machines, over more cinematic effects.
The transformation scenes for example, where the Count morphs from a bat to the undead human occur off-screen, rather than some form of cross fade etc. Is this a choice driven by lack of money? Lack of cinematic ambition of a choice to stick to the stage material? To be honest, I have too little knowledge or experience of Tod Browning's work to suggest a reason, but when all's said and done, it did work.
Let's be honest, this is 80 years old and is not the least bit scary and it is hard not to laugh, but in context, I'm sure it worked well at the time and the story is well conveyed. Lagosi's undead performance is hammy by today's standards but he was somewhat likable. He was very deliberate, slow and the silent era has certainly left its scars, as the subtly of sound performing was yet to take hold.
But this is the sort of film were silent melodramatic acting still worked. This is of course a piece Gothic Horror, the home of melodrama if ever there was one. This is surly a product of its time, both as the industry went through one of it's most dramatic changes, which ended so many careers as well a created so many new ones, but it's also, let's not forget, the first direct adaptation of Bram Stoker's book, besides the 1922 German version, Nosferatu, which changes a fair few details to try to get around the copyright, failing to do so mind, resulting in failed bid to have every copy of the film destroyed.
This is the film that ingrained the image of the Dracula that we know today into popular culture. This was were the Universal horror franchise began. For whatever faults it has by today's standards, it did something right.
Luc Horvathova (60 KP) rated Dracula in Books
Oct 22, 2019
Gripping, entertaining well written master piece
Contains spoilers, click to show
The book is written in form of letters and diaries. It starts in Dracula's castle in Transylvania as Harker, the estate agent is going through the sale of some properties over in England. His good relationship with count starts to crumble as some weird things start happening and the place he's staying gets really scary. After the transaction is over and Harker is free to go home, he collapses on the way and gets submitted into the hospital. Meanwhile story starts explaining the relationship of his fiancé Mina and her best friend Lucy. Lucy is choosing her future husband while getting really sick for an unknown reason. Her sleep walking and getting pale and lifeless worries Mina. Lucy's future husband seeks help at his friend psychiatrist who calls his old friend Van Helsing. Meanwhile in psychiatric institute one of the patients behaves very strangely, specially at night time. Lucy's condition gets really bad and eventually she dies, breaking everyone's heart. In the same time Mina meets her sick fiance and get married moving into their new home. After Lucy's death she meets Van Helsing And others and together they figure out that count Dracula is behind this all. As much as vampires are scary, the group is determined to kill count under any circumstances. One of the last losses is Mina getting into Dracula's hands and slowly turning into vampire herself. The hunt begins to be very serious and our friends are getting very desperate...how does the story ends, it's up to you to find out by reading this masterpiece.
Shakespeare's Women and the Fin de Siecle
Book
Shakespeare's Women and the Fin de Siecle illuminates the most iconoclastic performances of...
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Horrified: Universal Monsters Strategy Board Game in Tabletop Games
Oct 31, 2020
Horrified is a co-op board game based on the beloved Universal Monsters properties, and it's pretty damn fun.
First off, I love this series of movies. I recently bought a Blu-Ray boxset of them that I've been slowly working through, and they are still as entertaining now as they were when I was a kid.
Horrified pits 2-5 players against a selection of these horror icons, requiring them to complete character specific tasks before ultimately attempting to defeat whichever beast chosen, saving villagers along the way.
The roster is made up of Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster and his Bride, The Wolfman, The Invisible Man, The Mummy, and The Creature from the Black Lagoon. Each monster brings different objectives to the table in order to slay them, adding a large amount of variety to multiple games.
You can also play around with the amount of monsters you take on at once, adding different levels of difficulty to proceedings.
At first glance, the rules and many game pieces can seen overwhelming, but once the understanding sets in (there's an extremely handy tutorial video on the games official YouTube channel), it's a fun and sometimes tense experience, that is easy enough for any player to grasp.
It really does rely heavily on co-op and strategy to secure a victory, if you don't work together, then death is all but guaranteed!
I would happily recommend Horrified to any board game fan, especially those who like a bit of horror thrown in for good measure.
A huge thank you to @Smashbomb for sending me this via a giveaway (seriously go and apply to them!). Nice one!
First off, I love this series of movies. I recently bought a Blu-Ray boxset of them that I've been slowly working through, and they are still as entertaining now as they were when I was a kid.
Horrified pits 2-5 players against a selection of these horror icons, requiring them to complete character specific tasks before ultimately attempting to defeat whichever beast chosen, saving villagers along the way.
The roster is made up of Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster and his Bride, The Wolfman, The Invisible Man, The Mummy, and The Creature from the Black Lagoon. Each monster brings different objectives to the table in order to slay them, adding a large amount of variety to multiple games.
You can also play around with the amount of monsters you take on at once, adding different levels of difficulty to proceedings.
At first glance, the rules and many game pieces can seen overwhelming, but once the understanding sets in (there's an extremely handy tutorial video on the games official YouTube channel), it's a fun and sometimes tense experience, that is easy enough for any player to grasp.
It really does rely heavily on co-op and strategy to secure a victory, if you don't work together, then death is all but guaranteed!
I would happily recommend Horrified to any board game fan, especially those who like a bit of horror thrown in for good measure.
A huge thank you to @Smashbomb for sending me this via a giveaway (seriously go and apply to them!). Nice one!
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Near Dark (1987) in Movies
Nov 3, 2020
Bill Paxton (1 more)
Lance Henrikson
Finger-Lickin' Good!
Near Dark- is a great neo-western horror film about vampires. It was directed by Kathryn Bigelow, it was also her debut film.
The plot: Cowboy Caleb Colton (Adrian Pasdar) meets gorgeous Mae (Jenny Wright) at a bar, and the two have an immediate attraction. But when Mae turns out to be a vampire and bites Caleb on the neck, their relationship gets complicated. Wracked with a craving for human blood, Caleb is forced to leave his family and ride with Mae and her gang of vampires, including the evil Severen. Along the way Caleb must decide between his new love of Mae and the love of his family.
Vampire films had become "trendy" by the time of Near Dark's production, with the success of Fright Night (1985) and The Lost Boys (1987), the latter released two months before Near Dark and grossing $32 million. Kathryn Bigelow wanted to film a Western movie that departed from cinematic convention.
The combination of the genres had been visited at least twice before on the big screen, with Curse of the Undead (1959) and Billy the Kid Versus Dracula (1966).
Bigelow knew (and later married) director James Cameron, who directed Aliens (1986), a film that shares three cast members (Paxton, Goldstein and Henriksen) with Near Dark. Actor Michael Biehn was offered the role of Jesse Hooker, but he rejected the role because he found the script confusing. Lance Henriksen took over the role. A cinema seen in the background early in the film has Aliens on its marquee and Cameron played the man who "flips off" Severen.
Its a classic and a cult film.
The plot: Cowboy Caleb Colton (Adrian Pasdar) meets gorgeous Mae (Jenny Wright) at a bar, and the two have an immediate attraction. But when Mae turns out to be a vampire and bites Caleb on the neck, their relationship gets complicated. Wracked with a craving for human blood, Caleb is forced to leave his family and ride with Mae and her gang of vampires, including the evil Severen. Along the way Caleb must decide between his new love of Mae and the love of his family.
Vampire films had become "trendy" by the time of Near Dark's production, with the success of Fright Night (1985) and The Lost Boys (1987), the latter released two months before Near Dark and grossing $32 million. Kathryn Bigelow wanted to film a Western movie that departed from cinematic convention.
The combination of the genres had been visited at least twice before on the big screen, with Curse of the Undead (1959) and Billy the Kid Versus Dracula (1966).
Bigelow knew (and later married) director James Cameron, who directed Aliens (1986), a film that shares three cast members (Paxton, Goldstein and Henriksen) with Near Dark. Actor Michael Biehn was offered the role of Jesse Hooker, but he rejected the role because he found the script confusing. Lance Henriksen took over the role. A cinema seen in the background early in the film has Aliens on its marquee and Cameron played the man who "flips off" Severen.
Its a classic and a cult film.
CarlaM (53 KP) rated Devil's Cry : Shade of Devil Book 2 in Books
Dec 6, 2019
I'd Follow This Devil Anywhere!
What a great Continuation of Sorin's story.
Gosh! I loved every minute of this book. Shayne has a true talent for making us fall In love with his main characters. Sorin Is no different! He is powerful, charismatic and Sexy with a very human side that makes him extremely endearing for a Vamp. You either want to bed him or be his best mate and frankly, when you see who he hangs out with you will be biting at the bit ... or the neck ...to join the gang!
The story continues with Sorin's quest to take Down Dracula, but straight of the bat several new threats make themselves known, the least of them the Witches who complicate matters For Sorin and add some great action scenes to this story.
The emotional and sexual build up in this book creates a lovely tension that sits nicely in between the action and all the story driven sequences and I found that I flitted from emotion to emotion. From feeling sad for his losses, Angry that he was wronged, Affection for his love Interests.... and a couple of spicy scenes that made me sit up a little straighter in my seat.
All In all I really enjoyed this book. It had a feeling of familiarity as it very much reminds me of a classic vampire tale.... but then it surprises you with some lovely new mysteries.
I really can't recommend this book enough!
And Can't wait to see were the next book takes me!
Gosh! I loved every minute of this book. Shayne has a true talent for making us fall In love with his main characters. Sorin Is no different! He is powerful, charismatic and Sexy with a very human side that makes him extremely endearing for a Vamp. You either want to bed him or be his best mate and frankly, when you see who he hangs out with you will be biting at the bit ... or the neck ...to join the gang!
The story continues with Sorin's quest to take Down Dracula, but straight of the bat several new threats make themselves known, the least of them the Witches who complicate matters For Sorin and add some great action scenes to this story.
The emotional and sexual build up in this book creates a lovely tension that sits nicely in between the action and all the story driven sequences and I found that I flitted from emotion to emotion. From feeling sad for his losses, Angry that he was wronged, Affection for his love Interests.... and a couple of spicy scenes that made me sit up a little straighter in my seat.
All In all I really enjoyed this book. It had a feeling of familiarity as it very much reminds me of a classic vampire tale.... but then it surprises you with some lovely new mysteries.
I really can't recommend this book enough!
And Can't wait to see were the next book takes me!
Neil Jordan: Interviews
Book
These interviews cover the career to date of Neil Jordan (b. 1950), easily the most renowned...
LT
Let the Right One in
8.0
Rate It
Book
Audiences can't get enough of fang fiction. Twilight, True Blood, Being Human, The Vampire Diaries,...