Sounds interesting. Being I'm almost done with the Stoker novel (I know, I've been working at it forever), that may be a nice follow-up.
My problem with Dracula thus far is it's BORING as hell for long stretches. I just kind of found it in a box the other day, still with the bookmark in it where I had last left off with it about two months ago.
Stokers Dracula is intensely boring. If not for the movies, nobody would care about Drac.
That's what makes me curious about this new book. It just came out in March, so I'm hopeing that it moves at a more modern, fast pace. I dunno. I'll probably pick it up next week at the comic store.
Did I mention how great it is to have a decent comic store local to me again?
Finished it about a week ago. Kinda plodding, but not nearly as bad as Stoker's original novel. Lots of subplots and the Count doesn't show until mid-way through the book, after that it's pretty standard fare until it's conclusion. Renfield has this Golum/Smegal deal going on and the Count bites it (no pun) without much fanfare or suspense. If I had to give it a comparison, King's " 'Salem's Lot" kicks the **** out of this one.
Stoker's novel is pretty dry in many places. I read one of those illustrated classic books that was set up like our very own comics. It hit the high points without detracting from the overall story, actually making the damn thing more enjoyable.
King's 'Salems Lot is indeed far better. So is Brian Lumely's Necroscope/Bloodworld series (IMHO the best vampire books EVER written, bar none), Interview With The Vampire about the first eight or nine books in Laurell K. Hamilton's Anita Blake series and Bentley Little's (You knew he was going to be mentioned here. ) The Summoning.
You want to read some good Vampire books? Read those I listed above. Dracula is significant for it's importance to the genre, but isn't worth the time if you want something that reads smoothly and forges ahead with little lag. I don't think I'll be picking up the sequel.