Rick wrote:
I don't know where Jean-Claude comes up with 85% but I assume it's just a theoretical number meant to indicate "a bunch."  

Immediately after the re-discovery and release of Melford's DRACULA, I think the overall reaction was pretty universally that it was better than Browning's.  Maybe it was 85% in that first blush of enthusiasm.  But it seems to me that the bloom is pretty much off that rose now that the newness has worn off.  My best guess would be that the number of folks who prefer the Melford is still pretty sizable, but probably less than half.  Amongst American fans, that is.  On the continent... who knows?

Personally, I'm gonna have to take another look at the Melford (some day).  I was among those swept away by it when it re-appeared, but I'm now back in the Browning camp.  But I'm not sure that my opinion hasn't swung too far back.  Must refresh my feeble brain.  (But I doubt that any fresh, clear-eyed reappraisal is gonna help Villarias' performance any.  It's always gonna be pretty goofy.)


'

I agree Rick.  I'm right there with you on this.  Personally, there are things which I do like better about the Melford version than I do the Browning version.  But Villarias isn't one of them.  To be fair, though, Carlos Villarias is not completely incompetent.  There are times when he is even quite brilliant - BUT - his goofiness in some key scenes undermines his effectiveness in the parts where he is good. 

Primarily, Browning's version of DRACULA really only suffers due to poor editing - I think Clark Holloway's re-edit of the film bears this out - and largely exonerates Browning's reputation.

I like the way David Skal put it:  The Spanish Language Version of DRACULA is like discovering new rooms in a familiar old house.  And that's the way I see it - as a complimentary addition to a classic horror film.

- GJS