Dracula

Starring David Suchet and Tom Hiddleston

De: Bram Stoker

Narrado por: David Suchet, Tom Hiddleston

Tom Hiddleston (The Night Manager) stars as Jonathan Harker, with David Suchet (Poirot) as Dracula in Liz Lochhead's powerful BBC radio adaptation of the classic novel by Bram Stoker.

When solicitor Jonathan Harker sets off for Transylvania to sell the mysterious Count Dracula a Gothic mansion, his bride-to-be, Mina, begs him to stay - to no avail. But on arrival at Dracula's castle, deep in a black forest surrounded by wolves, Harker wishes he had listened to his fiancée. The Count is welcoming but unnerving and his castle oppressive. Plagued by nightmares, Harker soon longs to leave.

Back in Whitby, Mina is increasingly worried. She has heard nothing from Jonathan, and now her sister, Lucy - newly engaged to Harker's friend, Dr Seward - is becoming pale and thin. In Seward's lunatic asylum in London, a madman named Renfield babbles about his master, who is coming. And as a midnight storm rages, a black ship heads towards the English coast....

Acclaimed poet and playwright Liz Lochhead's adaptation was first performed onstage in 1985, and this thrilling radio drama was broadcast on the World Service in 2006. Suspenseful, chilling and suffused with dark eroticism, it retains all the eerie dread of Stoker's infamous horror novel.

Duration: 2 hours approx.

©2016 BBC Studios Distribution Ltd (P)2016 BBC Studios Distribution Ltd

Loved it!! Love Tom Hiddleston ❤

Such a great story!! It's great to be able to listen to it! ❤❤ Great!

An okay adaptation

What did you like best about Dracula? What did you like least?

The best thing about this recording is David Suchet's performance as Dracula! That's really saying something considering I'm a hardcore hiddlestoner! suchet steals every scene he's in. The worst thing about this recording is that it is an adaptation and not the actual Bram Stoker book. It is very severely adapted and abridged.

What could Bram Stoker have done to make this a more enjoyable book for you?

Nothing! This is a severely adapted dramatization by somebody else. He didn't write it!

Did the narration match the pace of the story?

Yes.

Could you see Dracula being made into a movie or a TV series? Who should the stars be?

No, because this is just a very commercialized version of the original book. Except for Suchet's and Hiddleston's performances the story is lifeless.

Any additional comments?

It's okay as a radio adaptation. Just be aware that's what it is!

Lovely voices

Story was way to short - very abridged and that was quite disappointing. Tom Hiddleston was, as always delicious.

Disappointing

I love David Suchet and could listen to him read anything. This overdramatized adaptation just wasn’t very good. I was pretty disappointed.

Nothing like the original

I understand that this is an adaptation, which means changes, but it drives me crazy when they change small details that didn't need to be changed. They changed names and relationships between characters that could have been kept to the original. It was well performed, just badly adapted.

Heavily abridged in text, faithful in spirit.

If you're looking for a quick and satisfying adaptation of Dracula's basic story, this is a perfectly serviceable take. Pretty much any adaptation of Dracula is going to cut out or simplify large portions of the book, unless its explicit goal is to replicate as much as possible (like the Copolla film starring Gary Oldman, though that also ADDS a lot). Adaptations like both NOSFERATU films or the 1931 Bela Lugosi film cut and modify a lot as well, and those are beloved. If you want the book, there's a full-cast audio book available elsewhere.

As for what they changed, the changes all WORK even though some are a little mystifying. Jack Seward, the head of Renfield's asylum who tries and fails for Lucy's hand, and Arthur Holmwood, the successful suitor, are combined into a single Arthur Seward, asylum head and fiancé. However, Holmwood (renamed Edgar) and Quincy Morris are REFERENCED as other suitors, but never actually appear "onscreen". Why not just cut them entirely? And while the subplot with Mina and Lucy's maid Flora is interesting, it also feels somewhat superfluous.

In regards to the performances, obviously the standout here is David Suchet as the titular count. He's balanced on a knife's edge between suave sophistication and barely contained animal rage, like a Hannibal Lecter. You can really picture the exact look and mannerisms of this Dracula purely by his performance. Hiddleston is good as well, his work won't blow your mind but it's certainly as solid as you'd expect from probably the best choice for a 2010s Jonathan Harker. Everyone else is totally serviceable as well.

If you're a Dracula fan, it's worth spending a couple hours of your time checking this out, considering being a fan means being okay with hearing this story retold over and over with slight variations. If you're looking for a first taste of the count that's not the novel itself, however, while this isn't a bad choice, there are certainly better ones you could look to (the 1931 Lugosi version, 1958's HORROR OF DRACULA with Christopher Lee, 1970's COUNT DRACULA by Jess Franco also starring Lee, or the aforementioned 1996 Coppolla version with Oldman).

Loved 🥰

Was a fabulous rendition of a loved classic. I couldn’t get enough! I could listen to it over and over again!!

Thorough, yet Short

Lovely voice acting done well. the abridged story still huts all the classic notes and Suchet's Dracula commands his ancient, foreign charisma beautifully.

Dracula

This was a great adaptation of the Bram Stoker book. With few exceptions, it followed the plot line.

I thought it was an easy way to sum up this story

I never actually fully listened to Bram Stockers Dracula before as much of a vampire enthusiast I am but this was a nice way to listen to the story.