Dracula (2020)

Netflix | Release Date: January 4, 2020

6.2	USER SCORE Generally favorable reviews based on 120 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Review this TV Series

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

UlisesvillaJan 8, 2020

Amazing! First time a saw dracula like a real beast since 1992, a classic but in the same time a diferent view of the character

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

nanamihsJan 6, 2020

This series is perfect! It brings us rich script and genius. The horror is explicit there, the elegance of the dracula with seduction was conveyed to perfection. The rotist managed to catch the viewer by surprise, who watched thinking thatThis series is perfect! It brings us rich script and genius. The horror is explicit there, the elegance of the dracula with seduction was conveyed to perfection. The rotist managed to catch the viewer by surprise, who watched thinking that would have only some things modified from the book Bram Stoker falls into the trap perfectly. I like the confusion the show has, it makes you wonder what is going on all the time, and then makes the revelation with a big surprise. I was delighted with the photography in each scene you get clearly observes the talent of the production. Only thing that the series to be lost was in the relationship of Luci and in the fitting of Jack and the doctor there, but closing with a golden key the end. They fulfilled what was in the plot and objective of the dracula, exposing in a very magnificent and philosophical way… Expand

4 of 9 users found this helpful45

All this user's reviews

The-Would-BeFeb 4, 2020

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It's probably important to note up front that of all the classic monster archetypes... werewolves, ghosts, mummies, monsters built by man or emerging from the bowels of the earth or the sea... the mythos of “The Vampire” is definitely my favorite. One of the movies that comes to mind when I think about films that made me want to make movies for a living is 1987's “The Lost Boys”. And, if I were a properly pretentious filmmaker, I'd tell you that my favorite version of the Grandpappy of all vampires is 1931's “Dracula” with Bela Lugosi. Or perhaps even one of the ten times Christoper Lee donned the fangs during the 1950's - 70's. But, truthfully, my favorite version of Dracula is actually 1992's “Bram Stoker's Dracula”. What....? Yes, the one with Keanu Reeves as Johnathan Harker.... excuse me, you realize Gary Oldman, Anthony Hopkins and Winona Ryder were in it too, right? It was visually stunning, atmospheric and the creature FX hold up to this day, thank you very much! *takes deep breathe* Anyway.... I mention all this to make it clear that any vampire story has a pretty high bar to clear for me to be impressed. And, I'm happy to say, the BBC's latest retelling of “Dracula” flew over that bar like The Count exploding into a swarm of bats. The first thing that comes to mind as I think back on this series of television movies is the atmosphere. Every setting we encounter, from The Count's ominous castle keep to the more brightly lit, but no less harsh convent where we meet Dracula's main antagonist Agatha Van Helsing, all seem engulfed in their own forms of imposing darkness. The entire story world going from Noir to a more brightly colored Neo-Noir as the series progresses.

And, although there is definitely gore in this series, so much of the horror is not about blood and guts, but a truly Gothic sense of psychological horror befitting a story about The Count. It seeks to make your skin crawl with disturbing imagery that just feels wrong or unnatural, not simply bloody. It's everything from a physical “transformation” that feels like a lost scene from John Carpenter's “The Thing” to an almost literal dead baby joke.

Speaking of jokes one of the most unique aspects of this retelling is the portrayal of Dracula himself. Most times Dracula is presented as quiet and aloof. The dark, mysterious stranger off in the corner trying not to be noticed as he scouts his next target. But here we have a Count who quite enjoys being the center of attention with a dark sense of humor that borders on being down right snarky at times. Make no mistake though, he's still a predator. Just a predator who likes to play with his food before devouring it. Now, for the literature purists out there, my absolute favorite aspect of this series may be the thing that will turn traditionalists off the most... the reinterpretation of the long standing “rules” of Vampirism. Crosses, needing to be invited in, stakes to the heart, the destructive power of the sun and a number of other tropes are all deconstructed, turned on their head or flat out dismissed. The Van Helsing character spends much of the series trying to separate the fact from the fiction of the old legends about vampires, which culminates in a very interesting explanation of why all of the various weaknesses and limitations of vampires seem so scattershot in her view. My personal favorite of all of these reinterpretations of the “rules” is the explanation of why the cross holds such sway over The Count. The difference between Dracula's explanation and Van Helsing's explanation are vast and both are brilliant storytelling in their own way.

My only real gripe with this series is the finale which, in some ways, feels a bit anticlimactic in comparison to the epic journey through space and time we've been taken on through the rest of the series. After all the blood shed and understanding how the world responds to the type of threat Dracula would represent in the finale's, let's say... “new setting”, I was looking forward to an epic, bloody, physical conflict to try and rid the world of The Count. Instead what we have is a drawn out mental chess match between Dracula and Van Helsing. The performances are strong so it's not bad, it just wasn't what I was hoping for. That said there are so many unanswered questions about Van Helsing, the organization she works for, their goals, which have an air of nefariousness, there are a ton of possible new directions the story could go in, in a second season. I very much look forward to watching.

Final Score: [8.5 out of 10]… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

jugadorhardcoreMar 20, 2020

Absoulutly stunning show. Amazing cast and script. One of the best series nowdays in my opinion. I love it!!!

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

tangey524Jan 8, 2020

This is a fabulous show. I love the length of each episode. The details, the drawing you in and wowing you over and over.

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

PoccioJan 20, 2020

I've found this mini serie brilliant. Full of of quotes from the great Vampires movies classics like Murnau's and Herzgog's Nosferatu passing through Coppola's "Bram's Stoker Dracula" till to the very appearance of Dracula himself clearlyI've found this mini serie brilliant. Full of of quotes from the great Vampires movies classics like Murnau's and Herzgog's Nosferatu passing through Coppola's "Bram's Stoker Dracula" till to the very appearance of Dracula himself clearly inspired by the classics with Bela Lugosi. Starting with the first episode Dracula will bring us in some very unexpected and new situations for the character of the Count. With "Dracula" the production made a bet giving finally to the audience something very fresh and enjoyable in a panorama of increasingly banal and discounted tv series.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

Veto92Jan 13, 2020

It is simply amazing. The atmosphere is spectacular. The actors are great and the way the director understands and tells the story of Bram Stoker is magnificent. I honestly think it's a great series

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

zowiterJan 6, 2020

Not surprisingly, lots of people don't like the new "Dracula" because it doesn't follow the original plot of the book, but there're lots of versions that all seems to be the same - we all know Count Dracula's story. Gattis and Moffat broughtNot surprisingly, lots of people don't like the new "Dracula" because it doesn't follow the original plot of the book, but there're lots of versions that all seems to be the same - we all know Count Dracula's story. Gattis and Moffat brought the new vision that rethinks the whole story. Undoudtedly, although the last episode might be a shock, we should admit that that twist in a plot is really extrodinary and gripping to watch. Moffat and Gattis have shown a boldness and an unusual mindset that cannot be underestimated. No matter what you have to see it.… Expand

1 of 6 users found this helpful15

All this user's reviews

marcmyworksJul 19, 2020

The Dracula mini-series is more like a trilogy of films adding a new perspective on a classic story. The first two of these films are interesting and worth the watch, the third, unfortunately like most trilogies, is the weakest and has a lotThe Dracula mini-series is more like a trilogy of films adding a new perspective on a classic story. The first two of these films are interesting and worth the watch, the third, unfortunately like most trilogies, is the weakest and has a lot of missed opportunities. Film 1 = 8/10
Film 2 = 8/10
Film 3 = 5/10… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

Dsros96Jun 3, 2020

Very original adaptation of Dracula with a deeper meaning than most vampire movies do.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

DiptanshuApr 24, 2020

entertaining series!great acting specially the dracula he's portrayal was perfect!music was great!1st episode was terrifying and nice start to series the nun's gathering scene the wolf teared and dracula arrives the story telling of bride toentertaining series!great acting specially the dracula he's portrayal was perfect!music was great!1st episode was terrifying and nice start to series the nun's gathering scene the wolf teared and dracula arrives the story telling of bride to be it was entertaining 1st episode!then 2nd episode felt like who's the murderer quiz type the voyage to england with chess game storytelling amazing the ending was shock as sudden change to timeline felt wow!then 4rd episode at start was ok but then the mobile the lab/cell thing felt like a vampire spoof and whole lucy thing was way too much terrible it felt stretched but the beautiful colors and scenes were engaging to watch and then the ending it was amazing the weakness of dracula and sacrifice was great!overall entertaining series!… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

Cska_aelMar 13, 2020

Even though the idea of having Dracula who swings both ways is a bit off I still enjoyed this Neflix series ,the idea of showing how Count Dracula find's his way in modern London is brilliant,and Dolly Wells was amazing.

0 of 4 users found this helpful04

All this user's reviews

mrmonsterDec 17, 2020

The miniseries starts off very strong, especially due to the lead performance from Claes Bang, but ultimately, it's failings towards the end stop it from being something truly great.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

Bertaut1Jan 27, 2021

A sarcastic posthumanist Dracula won't be to everyone's taste, but I thoroughly enjoyed this unique take on the Count

Adapted from Bram Stoker's 1897 novel by Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat, and running a hefty 270 minutes (divided into threeA sarcastic posthumanist Dracula won't be to everyone's taste, but I thoroughly enjoyed this unique take on the Count

Adapted from Bram Stoker's 1897 novel by Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat, and running a hefty 270 minutes (divided into three episodes of 90 minutes each), this series seeks to capture the tone of the novel, if not necessarily the plot. There are some problems, and fans of the novel have taken especial (and not entirely unjustified) umbrage with the unexpected narrative shift in the last episode, but all in all, I thoroughly enjoyed this version.

Hungry, 1897; Jonathan Harker (John Heffernan), an English lawyer sent to Transylvania some months prior, is physically deformed and mentally fragile, and is staying at a small convent. Having written an account of his experiences, Harker is interviewed by the acerbic Sister Agatha (a superb Dolly Wells), who is hoping he can fill in some of the details he left absent from his document. And so he tells how he came to Transylvania to meet the elderly Count Dracula (an exceptional Claes Bang), and of the subsequent horrors he experienced.

Whereas the novel begins just before Harker arrives at Castle Dracula, the show begins with him already in a nunnery in Hungry, having fled the castle, and the novel's multi-perspective epistolary narrative is replaced with a more basic single-character flashback-style narration. Opening this way is a wise move, as it alerts the audience that this isn't a 1:1 adaptation.

Each episode looks and feels substantially different from the other two; the first is a basic gothic horror full of deep shadows, huge towers, labyrinthine interiors, and ominous opulence; the second is a ship-based murder-mystery (except, of course, we all know who the killer); and the third is a gaudy, postmodernist-infused examination of youthful vapidity, corporate greed, and the all-conquering power of superficiality. Arwen Jones's production design across all three episodes is also stunning; from the twisting staircases and dead-end tunnels of Castle Dracula to the weather-beaten Demeter (the doomed ship in the second episode) to Dracula's residence in the third episode, everything on screen seems completely real and lived in.

And there are also some extraordinary visual moments here. A close-up of a fly crawling on an eyeball, for example, which then crawls behind the eyeball is particularly disturbing, as is a scene where Dracula literally climbs out of a wolf. The exterior shots of Castle Dracula are also amazing, and why wouldn't they be as the show uses the incredible Orava Castle in Slovakia, which was also used for Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens (1922).

The acting is also terrific, particularly Bang as the sarcastic Count and Wells as perhaps the most irreverent nun ever committed to screen. Much of the strength of their performances comes in how well they handle the dry humour. So, for example, when the convent is surrounded by bats, and Agatha is asked "why would the forces of darkness wish to attack a convent", she replies (completely deadpan), "perhaps they're sensitive to criticism." Later, explaining to Harker how he has had artists paint the sun for him, he then says, "And Mozart wrote such a pretty little tune", before mumbling to himself, "I really should have spared him". The nonchalant way Bang delivers the line is hilarious. As the show goes on, Bang gets to show more of his range, bringing out not just Dracula's confidence and sarcasm, but so too his pride, frustration, boredom, and fears, culminating in an exceptional final scene, with Bang doing some wonderful silent acting.

Thematically, the show deconstructs much traditional vampire lore, particularly the power of crucifixes; why would Dracula fear the cross when he doesn't believe in God? Along the same lines, his immortality is examined in light of the boredom that it must entail. Similar deconstruction of his need for blood sees it presented more like an addiction than a necessity.

As for problems, many viewers despised the last episode, and I can see why (although I loved it), as it takes things in a new, unexpected direction that asks more than a little leap of faith from the audience. Certainly, if the first two episodes form a broadly coherent unit, the third disrupts everything, and is thematically, aesthetically, and tonally divorced from its predecessors. Some of the humour in this episode also pushes things a little too far. I'm also not sure the show needed to be as long as it is; three 60 minute episodes probably would have sufficed.

That aside though, I loved this adaptation, which captures much of the tonal qualities of the original very well. It deviates wildly from the book, but featuring a suitably posthumanist Dracula for our jaded times, Gatiss and Moffat may not have pleased traditionalists, but this is a fine attempt to bring Dracula into the 21st century without ever losing sight of his origins and raison d'être.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

Current TV Shows

By MetascoreBy User Score

1 92 The Pitt: Season 2

2 90 The Celebrity Traitors UK: Season 1

3 87 Hacks: Season 5

4 87 Industry: Season 4

5 87 Genndy Tartakovsky's Primal:...

6 85 The Beatles Anthology

7 85 The Traitors [UK]: Season 4

8 85 Bait: Season 1