DRACULA (1931) and its Spanish version; Hammer's 1958 DRACULA (AKA Horror of Dracula in the US); COUNT DRACULA (El Conde Dracula, 1970); the 1973 DAN CURTIS' DRACULA; Coppola's 1992 BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA, and more.
I really enjoyed the fact that Charles and Eddie Butler have organized their book by actors-- after an initial recap of the origins and contents of Stoker's novel, the following chapters are headed with the Dracula in question: Lugosi, Lee, and so on. Each chapter is separated into a recap of the film followed by a review. What I liked here is the chatty voice and attention to detail-- it's great to read about the limitations of the Spanish EL CONDE DRACULA and the problems of the 1979 Langella Dracula in one book. (And since this is a book that essentially studies multiple versions of the same story, the similarities and themes "pop" more for their recurrence.)
I love that this is a new exploration of Dracula on film, so we get a fresh look at these films. For instance, I've long wanted to see someone try to explain why the 1992 Dracula 
is so beloved-- I remember hating it when it came out but have softened towards it in time, but I too have often wondered why this version above all has been revered as closest to the book, whatever people take that to mean. Butler makes a sound argument that the movie's place in the canon has less to do with the obvious talent of Coppola than with the fact that by 1992, there hadn't been a Dracula in about fifteen years-- unlike in, say, 1979, when Langella's Dracula came barely six years after Christopher Lee's last outing. I also completely agree with Butler's argument that Gary Oldman was a poor choice for Dracula, whereas giving Udo Kier a grown-up return to the role would have been a smasher. But then, but then.
This is a cool e-book; Dracula fans should check it out.
One minor note-- I wish the Kindle edition had a working Table of Contents-- that would make a huge difference in the Kindle enjoyment of the book. But you can't have everything!
