Quote: "How so? It may prove that Melford wasn't watching Browning's rushes and then improving on them in his version, but it can't be said to prove that the Spanish version is vastly superior on all points. As for Villarias vs. Lugosi, it's a matter of taste as to which was the superior actor. I vote for Lugosi, but your mileage may vary."

How so? Melford's version has better ambiance/atmosphere, better use of the sets, better editing (I know it's not Browning's fault, but it's a fact), far better photography and effects, far more impressive violence (the mirror's scene, Dracula's death, etc), more coherence, best casting, etc. All together, for many people outside of the Lugosian fan club it makes a superior version. And all the rest, including this strange American idolatry for Bela Lugosi, is just popular belief based on faith, and not facts. Including this legend about Melford's staff watching the rushes of the US version. It was maybe true at the beginning, but the Hispanic version was "in the can" AND previewed far before Browning - or Freud - finished the other version. In other termes, the Hispanic Dracula is "the real thing" and the US version its pale copy, not the contrary. Just like for THE CAT CREEPS and EL GATO, all reports indicates that Melford's version was so superior to Julian's that the US version was partly re-shot.  smiley: laugh

Last Edited By: todmichel Jan 25 12 7:10 AM. Edited 3 times.