BBC Dracula

Jalapeno

Started Ep2 last night, but paused it for some kip.  Ep1 was a cracker !

axisus

Looks like episode 3 has gone down very badly with viewers in general. I think that this is Moffatt's achilles heel, he just can't see when something doesn't work.

Not that I've watched it! I've seen enough of Sherlock and Dr Who to know how totally hit and miss he is though

prowla

Seems like getting bored and switching over part way through the 1st episode might've been the right choice.

Philly_Q

axisus said:

Looks like episode 3 has gone down very badly with viewers in general. I think that this is Moffatt's achilles heel, he just can't see when something doesn't work.

Why blame Moffatt and not Gatiss?

axisus

Philly_Q said:

axisus said:

Looks like episode 3 has gone down very badly with viewers in general. I think that this is Moffatt's achilles heel, he just can't see when something doesn't work.

Why blame Moffatt and not Gatiss?

Gatiss has written some terrible stories as well (Dr Who Spitfires in space comes to mind), but Moffat was Dr Who showrunner at the time so responsible plus he is the Sherlock showrunner and main writer

Clarky

the War of the Worlds ending was shite too.. there's a pattern emerging

MikeS

.

Snags

Overall I think I'd have preferred it if they'd kept it all "in period" even with the mucking about. And the very, very end did seem to collapse a little too quickly and conveniently. But taken as a whole, I quite enjoyed it as a re-working of a well-trodden tale.

TimmyO

I liked it. I got spoilered re the 'twist' at the end of ep 2 which took away from the effect, but I think once they'd decided to do something different like that, what they did with it was interesting and entertaining. And you may as well do that as just crank out a new festive period piece homage. 

Did anyone else think the references to shady funding of the organisation leave something open for some sort of spinoff ? 

skullfunkerry

Snags said:

Overall I think I'd have preferred it if they'd kept it all "in period" even with the mucking about. And the very, very end did seem to collapse a little too quickly and conveniently. But taken as a whole, I quite enjoyed it as a re-working of a well-trodden tale.

That's pretty much how I felt too  

MrBump

I thought it was really good.  I love the way that it paid homage to Hammer and 1950's horror films, things like the lingering closeups of the protagonist.

And yes, Agatha was a show stealer.  But I thought the Count was awesome too.

57Deluxe

so where do ethical vegans stand on watching programmes like this...?

pmbomb

I really enjoyed Dracula. Including ep 3. It is what it is.

Q: the Dracula <-> Agatha scenes in ep 2, playing chess in a castle type environment, Dracula recounting the Demeter events IIRC. Where/when do they fit in the story line, with Agatha dying in the Demeter explosion?

Also lots of mentions of Lucy being special, was it resolved?

Philly_Q

pmbomb said:

Also lots of mentions of Lucy being special, was it resolved?

I think it was just that she was, supposedly, completely unafraid of dying.  But as it turned out she couldn't cope with losing her looks.  It was all blown up as a big deal but didn't amount to much, I thought she was a very tiresome character.

drofluf

57Deluxe said:

so where do ethical vegans stand on watching programmes like this...?

They were hiding behind the sofa.

HTH

Snags

@pmbomb I think the castle scenes are supposed to be dream sequences, but there were a couple of other bits where you just have to wave your hands and look the other way too (like, how did D nail himself into the coffin that sank).

pmbomb

Snags said:

@pmbomb I think the castle scenes are supposed to be dream sequences, but there were a couple of other bits where you just have to wave your hands and look the other way too (like, how did D nail himself into the coffin that sank).

those silly mistakes utterly ruin a drama about immortal shapeshifting supernatural beings learning languages and knowledge by drinking blood.

Snags

pmbomb said:

Snags said:

@pmbomb I think the castle scenes are supposed to be dream sequences, but there were a couple of other bits where you just have to wave your hands and look the other way too (like, how did D nail himself into the coffin that sank).

those silly mistakes utterly ruin a drama about immortal shapeshifting supernatural beings learning languages and knowledge by drinking blood.

Absolutely. Completely undermines the realism.

Snap

I've just started ep 3.
It's been too jokey and camp. could have been a lot darker if they had ditched the crap jokes and made Dracula less like Kenneth Williams.

First half hour of the last episode is like Dr Who - ie probably really crap.

Sister Agatha - straight out of a carry on film. 

Jetsam1

Oh, I was going to watch this. Once again folied by expectations of it being utterly rubbish by reading about something.

I will say that I would be less than enthused about yet another identikit period drama with nothing interesting going on. That has been done for Dracula and so what would be the point?