TITLE: Dracula
RELEASED: 28 December 2006
DIRECTOR: Bill Eagles
WRITER: Stewart Harcourt
CAST: Marc Warren, Dan Stevens, Sophia Myles, Stephanie Leonidas, Tom Burke, Donald Sumpter, Rafe Spall and David Suchet
The mid-2000s saw the BBC revisit several classic literary characters, with shows such as Robin Hood 2006 and Merlin 2008. So it is perhaps unsurprising that Dracula was resurrected around this time too.
In an intriguing twist, however, this version makes Holmwood the driving force of the plot. Now cursed with hereditary syphilis, he is desperate to find a cure so he can have the perfect married life with Lucy.
Holmwood unleashes Dracula
Holmwood is so desperate, in fact, that he ends up getting involved in a shady London cult. He strikes a deal with them, promising to pay for the transfer of their revered master to England in return for being cured.
This mysterious master is, of course, Count Dracula.
As usual, Jonathan Harker gets the task of visiting the Count, but this time he never returns. Instead, Dracula appears at Holmwood’s estate in Whitby, having used Harker’s ticket for the Demeter.
He then proceeds to go after the sexually frustrated Lucy. She falls ill, prompting Holmwood to call in their old friend Dr Seward.
After Lucy’s death, Seward investigates Holmwood’s links to the cult and manages to break into their headquarters. There he discovers a traumatised Van Helsing in the basement.
The Dutch professor is none too keen to battle Dracula, but is persuaded to help both Seward and Mina. A guilt-ridden Holmwood also joins the cause.
The film ends with the four of them ultimately defeating the Count – or so it seems.
A more complex Arthur Holmwood
This television movie has a lot of interesting new elements in it. Holmwood is promoted to a main character in this retelling and, as such, is rather different from his book counterpart.
He is far more morally ambiguous in this adaptation, but also more tragic, adding complexity to a character who is normally quite one-note.
David Suchet’s broken Van Helsing
The screenwriter similarly creates a darker and more subversive version of Van Helsing, portrayed here by the great David Suchet.
Van Helsing becomes an occult researcher who was sent by the cult to discover if Count Dracula was real. His encounter with the vampire and subsequent imprisonment transforms him into a terrified man – more Peter Vincent than Peter Cushing.
This idea that Van Helsing has been broken by the truth of his discoveries, and must now find the courage to face the vampire again, is a good concept.
Unfortunately, there is not much time to explore it here, and while Suchet’s acting is excellent, it is a shame we do not get to see him do the more traditional eccentric professor character too.
Does Marc Warren work as Dracula?
Finally, there is Dracula himself, the star of the show – except he does not really sparkle here.
That is not to say Marc Warren was not a good choice for the role. He is superb at being cold, creepy and insidious.
There is a definite hint of stranger danger about him, and his performance as the old Count is great, with his soft voice and fragile appearance.
However, his Dracula lacks a certain charisma. There is no suaveness to this Count, no campiness or scene chewing.
He is more of an emo vampire, one who endears himself to Mina because he seems sympathetic to her loss, rather than through raw charm. Considering the bleaker tone of the narrative, this does make sense.
Still, this Dracula feels a little flat in comparison with other versions of the Count.
Is Dracula 2006 worth watching?
Nevertheless, this television movie is a solid adaptation. Its locations and costumes are excellent, and the cast is great.
The narrative, meanwhile, does an excellent job of exploring and expanding on the classic Dracula themes of sex and disease. The suggestion that Dracula’s blood might be a cure for illness is an especially compelling idea.
All in all, this is a fascinating adaptation that is worth another look.
Read more: Katherine Sankey reviews Liz Lochhead’s Dracula.
