Disappointed, its just a remake of Dracula 1992

I thought it was beautifully made. Well written. Just a gorgeous film.

It is remake of 1922 Nosferatu. They are different from Dracula.

It's a remake of Dracula because the original 1922 Nosferatu was a blatant rip off of Dracula. It was so much of a blatant rip off that Bram Stoker's widow sued the film's producers and won. The German court which tried the case ordered that all copies of the film had to be destroyed, but thankfully a few prints escaped. But any remake of Nosferatu is going to be the Dracula story, because the original was simply a plagiarized version of the Dracula story.

I thought they were both trainwrecks in diffent ways. This is NO proper version of Bram Stoker's book ever made, and at this point, may never be. Although they are significantly different than the novel, the 1922 and 1979 Nosferatu films remain the best adaptions. Yes, the Lugosi, Lee and Langella incarnations are entertaining pulp fun, they are only the surface of the great novel.

The scenes heading to the castle, getting there, and escaping, have always been the best parts of most Dracula adaptions. Most adaptions can't seem to figure out how to present the rest of the novel as effectively, I'm afraid. It's no coincidence that a truncated version of the novel "Dracula's Guest" played in the theater for many years before the Lugosi version, and has ONLY that part. That's how Lugosi got the part in the film. He had been playing Dracula in the theater for years.