cleolinda expounds on Dracula with surprising (and at times hilarious) theories. Also invoked by her: cracked-out Sherlock Holmes explanations, and an unexpected LOLCat. A sample of what cleolinda wrote:I would actually love to be the screenwriter on a hypothetical (umpteenth) remake, or a co-writer, or at least a creative consultant... [T]here's a lot of imagery that people just don't use, and I think it would be really interesting to bring back the sentimental elements of these men swearing to protect Mina to the death. I think you could actually bring in the Twilight crowd if you touch on the more emotional points, and believe me, there is a whole lot of weepin' and prayin', as my Sentimental Literature professor once put it, in the original book. You wouldn't want to use too much of it, not for a modern audience, but it's available there on your filmmaking palette. I submit that the same girls who love Edward Cullen would fall for Jonathan Harker if you emphasized his tortured love for his brave, suffering wife. And they're both young, in their mid or early twenties.Read the rest of it! That's only a small chunk! She also says stuff like "Everyone in this book is an idiot, and I have figured out why. (Well, not Mina, because Mina is awesome.)"
...And you can show a book-accurate Mina who isn't all anachronistic Girl Power, but is uncommonly intelligent and stalwart and resourceful in a period-appropriate way, which is a HELL of a lot better than Bella. (For one, Mina has CAREER GOALS. You just got pwned by a demure Victorian, Swan.) But it could touch the same emotional nerves, if you see what I'm saying. And yet, you have the wonderfully awful horror aspect as well, if you take Dracula back to his original, non-romantic villain personality--take it back to a character who is alluring because he is horrible and terrifying, and you find yourself drawn in spite of yourself; take it back to that perversity, because I think people are going to be ready to go back to that in the next few years.
