I love it, even with its flaws

This was the second Dracula film I saw in my life (the first being "Scars of Dracula" with Christopher Lee), and I didn't like it much back then (I was 16, so you'll excuse me). I found it slow-moving, too static and stagy, comparing to the kind of horror films I was used to. Fortunately, my capacity to appreciate classical cinema improved considerably during the years following that, and seeing the other versions of Dracula (Murnau's, all of the Hammers, and even Coppola's monumental mess)and finally watching again Lugosi's, I discovered then the many beautiful things this film has. Lugosi's theatrical acting was obviously due to the fact that he had been doing the play on the stage for years and this film was his first leading role in a movie. But I love the way he delivers his lines, and you can see he really puts his heart into it.
The thing I really love is the fantastic art direction and cinematography in the castle sequences. When Renfield first enters the castle, that long shot of the great hall
with the Gothic arches and windows is so beautiful that I want to be there. And THAT shot of Lugosi suddenly popping out of nowhere and then walking through the cobweb without tearing it... How can anyone surpass that? All the Transylvanian sequence is pure German Expressionism. Karl Freund wasn't behind the camera just to have his name on the credits, was he?... he he he.
But the second half of the film really lets it down with those interminable takes of people talking, the dragging pace, the dullness of the Van Helsing character, etc.
But every time I watch it again I discover some new quality in it. And although Lugosi is not my Dracula No 1, I like him all the same, and he definitely made here one of the most memorable entrances in film history.