The importance of being Stoker (updated)

This article in the Guardian about how Bram Stoker's great-grand-nephew is going to write the sequel to Dracula contains many things to please me:

1. I am, pardon the pun, a sucker for a vampire. (Anyone watching True Blood? So hot.)
2. The great-grand-nephew's name is Dacre. (Which, in case you hadn't spotted it, is very close to Dracula. Although apparently it means 'trickling stream' in old English.)
3. Dracula was originally called Dracula: The Un-dead, 'before an editor changed the title'. (*This editor becomes drunk with power and goes off to see if she is working on any potential classic novels that will spawn a new genre/angsty obession, which she can change the title of and thus win eternal fame.*)
4. Dacre Stoker 'formerly coached the Canadian Olympic Pentathlon team.'

It also contains a few things that puzzle me:

1. Is this, like, for serious?
2. 'Our intent is to give both Bram and Dracula back their dignity.' Where did their dignity go? I, personally, have never thought, 'That original telling of the Dracula legend, man that's undignified.'
3. 'Maybe even more important is to give the novel's legions of loyal fans what they have been waiting over a century for...the return of the real Dracula.' The real Dracula? Is character authenticity hereditary? Can you put it in a will? And are the fans who have been waiting over a century un-dead themselves - or just really, really old?

*UPDATE*
Evidently we weren't the only people to find this amusing. The Guardian article has been changed; there is now an explanation of the indignity of Hollywood, no reference to the 'real Dracula' and no mention of fans waiting over a century. Thankfully, Dacre Stoker still formerly coached the Canadian Olympic pentathalon team. (Of course, the un-dead nature of the internet means you can still dig up the cached original article if you want to.)