In the notes for this issue, Moore and Reppion discuss the novel’s sexism. I think the less guarded description would be Stoker’s misogyny. It’s somewhat curbed here, in the adaptation, as the writers are aware of its presence, whereas Stoker would not have been.

Lots happens in the issue and I could only wonder how it would have read with a better artist. Verma continues to disappoint. Aaron Campbell’s no longer contributing and the comic has lost its visual flare. There’s no more mixed media. There’s no more visual creativity. It’s gone, now, from being a pleasant surprise to the kind of crap Radical puts out. It’s embarrassing, actually. I feel bad for the writers, since–if I were to have bought the hard cover sight unseen–I would have tried to return it once the art changed.

It’s beyond too bad, since the adaptation itself is quite well-written.

Unfortunately, Worley’s gone this issue (he’s credited with layouts). Verma is … Verma’s painted comic art looks like all the lame painted comic art I’ve seen before, the stuff to make me dread a painted comic. His figures are fine, his faces are awful. The texture and depth of the book is now gone. It’s so distractingly, it’s hard to think about the writing, as this change in artist takes the book from being a measured success to a moderate failure.

Oddly, Verma’s illustrating abilities are strong (his pencils are in the issue’s notes).

I can’t remember the novel, if there really is so much time spent on the death of Lucy, but when Moore and Reppion take the whole issue, it’s hard not to think something’s going to be missed. But Mina is Dracula’s victim in the novel, right? Not his lover. So they should be fine filling two issues.