"DRACULA THE UNDEAD"
by Dacre Stoker and Ian Holt, 2009
First, how dare Dacre Stoker imply that he is the descendant of Bram Stoker? He isn't, either biologically or literally. Screenwriter Ian Holt wrote virtually the entire thing, then hit up Dacre to put his name on the book as a publicity stunt.
And I wouldn't care if it was a faithful sequel. Instead, this book consists of 450 pages of pissing on the original. Every chance he can, Holt takes the events of the original "Dracula" and says they never happened. Honestly, would Bram Stoker authorize a sequel that refuted almost every detail he wrote? Not only does this book trash the events in "Dracula", but it has no respect for the characters and their personalities. Worst of all, Holt takes the character of Dracula and tries to make him a hero! Bram Stoker actually implied that Dracula was not just a vampire, but the ANTI-CHRIST!
On the good side, the writing itself is not bad. The book moves at a fast pace and there are some clever ideas. The choice of the villainess, while obvious, was a good one.
I'd like to see Holt write a vampire book of his own with his own original characters. Because if you don't understand someone else's characters, you should leave them alone.