Of course, Dracula would be the Son of the Dragon.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
My God, that third episode was terrible. It’s like it was written by an entirely different creative team who actively hated the first two episodes.
There’s a lot to complain about, but let me just focus on this one. The Dutch Nun comes back from the dead, possesses her not-exactly-a-descendant, and then… helps Dracula overcome three of his strongest weaknesses? Why is she helping him all of a sudden? She saw this dude feed an entire convent to a pack of wolves! He’s not a good dude! He’s not even a morally gray, “must kill to survive but feels terrible about it” dude! He’s straight up gleefully evil! And now he can be gleefully evil in broad daylight! Good job, Agatha!
Also, Dracula is a vampire. He’s hundreds of years old. He survives by drinking blood, and no other nutrients. He can age backwards. He can scale walls like a spider. He can transform back and forth from a wolf to a human. He’s immune to bullets. But somehow, the sunlight/cross/invitation aspects of his vampirism are the only bits that need an explanation? And the explanation is that it’s fucking psychosomatic? Why does the series accept all the other magical stuff Dracula can do, but needs a “realistic” explanation for this stuff?
Somewhere the ghost of Terry Prachett is trying to sue them for stealing his plot points from Carpe Jugulum.
I was just thinking, the ONE saving grace aspect of episode four was Drac’s observations of the 21st century.
That’s about the only thing I liked about episode 4.
I agree with this. Dracula is supposed to be sexy - I didn’t find this guy too appealing. For some reason he reminded me of James Mason 
and I really dislike James Mason. The only time he looked somewhat handsome to me was toward the end of E3 when he ws writhing around on the floor because of the sun. His writhing caused his hair to get a bit mussed. Then I thought - oh he’s kind of cute when his bangs aren’t slicked down.
Just finished this last night. I thought the first episode was great, the second one was pretty good, and then came the third episode which was a complete trainwreck. It’s rare to see a show go completely off the rails so badly like that.
Here’s my suspicion: The first three episodes were originally intended to be essentially the background and pilot for a new series about a modern day Dracula somehow becoming a dark anti-hero like Tom Ellis’s Lucifer. That last episode seemed like it was trying to adopt the tone of that show. But when the network saw how badly is was going in that third ep they pulled the plug and told them to finish it as a one-off trilogy. Thus we spend lots of time introducing the Harker Foundation, complete with mysteries about it that we never learn, only to have it completely dropped as a plot device because of a crazy lawyer demand.
It was all stupid. The idea that Dracula was just a poor old man who was afraid of dying was ridiculous. The effect of sunlight on him being psychosomatic was ridiculous. The idea that Van Helsing would see him even remotely sympathetically was ridiculous. The elaborate vampire holding facilities were ridiculous. And most ridiculous of all was the idea that after spending 133 years building elaborate vampire cells and making plans for Dracula’s return they would just let him walk out to terrorize the world because some sketchy lawyer showed up and demanded his release.
The ending redemption arc and Dracula and Van Helsing dying in each other’s arms was offensive to both characters.
If the three parter had been a two parter that ended with the explosion of the Demeter and Dracula’s box drifting slowly down into the depths with Van Helsing’s body following, I would have said it was a very good retelling of Dracula with some modern touches.
Given all three episodes together… thumbs down. Unfortunately. I really liked Abigail Von Helsing. I think it’s worth watching for the first two episodes and the acting and snappy dialog, but prepare to be disappointed when you queue up the last episode.