"Dracula" Gets the Moffat Treatment

So, I screwed up here. I accidentally watched the third and final episode of the new Stephen Moffat and Mark Gatiss "Dracula" series first. And this majorly, majorly colored my attitudes toward the whole series, in ways I can't discuss without spoiling the entire thing. So, I'll give the quick review up front.

The new "Dracula" for 2020, comprised of three ninety-minute installments similar to "Sherlock," is too clever for its own good, riffing off the original story and its most famous adaptations in increasingly wild and outlandish ways. It has an excellent Dracula in Danish actor Claes Bang, and a fascinating new antagonist for him - a keen, no-nonsense nun named Sister Agatha, played by Dolly Wells. As is common of Stephen Moffat reinventions, the aggressive amount of updating and meta commentary gets to be a bit much, especially in the final story. However, it's also highly entertaining and more properly scary than I anticipated.

Now, let's get to the spoilers. "Dracula" has received very mixed reactions from viewers, and a common complaint is that the last episode ruined everything that came before it. I went and watched that episode first, where Dracula comes to modern day London. I took it at face value, as a somewhat campy, somewhat irreverent modern update of the original "Dracula" story. Dracula gives his take on modern technology. Dracula outwits modern scientists. Dracula discovers social media and the modern dating scene. I found Claes Bang charming, Dolly Wells impressive, and Mark Gatiss as the fly-eating Renfield cheeky. The new version of Lucy (Lydia West), was a little on the frivolous side, but then most versions of Lucy are. The plotting was convoluted and the ending left me scratching my head, but I was overall decently entertained and ready for the next episode.

And then I quickly realized my mistake. It became abundantly clear to me why some viewers were so incensed with the finale. The first two episodes of "Dracula" not only take place in 1897 and largely follow the events of the Bram Stoker text, but they are tonally much darker, and structured completely differently. Modern humor and meta elements are much, much scarcer. There's a huge mystery component tied to the way each story is relayed - the first by Sister Agatha's interrogation of the hapless Jonathan Harker (John Heffernan), and the second by Dracula himself. The ending of the third episode didn't make much sense to me because it was paying off thematic material that had been previously set up in the 1897 episodes. The third episode also felt much more like an afterthought in context, built around the pieces of the Dracula mythos that hadn't been used for the first two. Yet overall, I still liked and appreciated that ending, having not had the chance to be disappointed by the sudden change in direction.

Yes, the 1897 episodes are significantly better. The characters of Dracula and Sister Agatha are richer, and it's more fun to watch them clash with each other. Sister Agatha in particular is a remarkably appealing creation, a dryly self-possesed scholar and investigator who does not hesitate to ask uncomfortable questions about Jonathan Harker's sex life. Claes Bang brings a certain relaxed confidence to Dracula that is a lot of fun, largely eschewing angst and tragedy in favor of unapologetic villainy. And he really has a sense of danger around him, with a screen presence closest to Christopher Lee's, though he more closely resembles Bela Lugosi. The high point of the series comes near the end of the first episode, where Dracula and Sister Agatha have their first big confrontation at the gates of a convent, goading and threatening each other. It's thrilling and bloody and has such a wonderful, razor-sharp sense of humor about it.

I'm honestly a little disappointed that this version of "Dracula" ends so decisively. I could have watched many, many hours of the Count and the Sister playing cat and mouse all over creation. On the other hand, much of the series' charm comes from the way that it plays off the original material - Jonathan Harker's visit to Transylvania, the voyage aboard the Demeter, and the seduction of Lucy Westenra. Going off into wholly original directions would probably spoil things, much in the same way those later years of "Sherlock" got increasingly silly.

So, Moffat's done it again, taking an old literary character out for a modern spin, a messy but overall enjoyable one. I recommend the first episode - though which first episode to start with is something I leave to you.
---