Dracula sounds like a damn winner. Coming from the writers of Sherlock and the modern Doctor Who, it certainly has the pedigree to be one.
Initially, it sure does look like it.
Think of Dracula as a made for TV (or streaming) movie. It’s 3 episodes of about 90 minutes each, so you can binge it all in one sitting.
Episode 1 is great. It’s atmospheric (with great acting by Claes Bang as the Count), had great sets (I can’t help but keep thinking of Castlevania when Harker’s in Dracula’s castle) and comes with a multitude of twists that show while the series is obviously influenced by the events in Bram Stoker’s novel, it is also it’s own beast.
The twists to the undead lore are most intriguing, as is how Dracula morphs from wolves and generates fog (in the second episode). It also gives a slant to the old bloodsucking motif; Dracula can absorb memories (such as language) from drinking somebody’s blood.
Episode 2 isn’t as groundbreaking (at least lore wise) as the first but does hold your interest as the Demeter makes its voyage to England. It’s only in the last few minutes that a mighty twist comes along that makes the series even more interesting.
…except that Episode 3 bungles it completely.
I’m not going to spoil it but suffice to say there’s a whole lot of coincidences and leaps of faith required in the final part that it basically ruins the whole thing.
It all pales in comparison to the whimper of an ending…which is as anti-climatic as I’ve ever seen a vampire story get. Yes, that includes the Twilight movies.
I wonder what happened that made it turn out that way? Budget? Writers bickering? The setting was ripe for the monumental twist that was set up in the ending of Episode 2 yet the final episode bungled it all up.
Perhaps there’ll be a Season 2 so that we can all forget Episode 3’s ending. In the meantime, if you’ve not watched it, I suggest you do.
Just try to ignore the stupid ending if you can and pray there’s a retcon in Season 2 (if there ever is one).