the Cinemateca de Cuba in Havana leading to several meetings to convince the archive to allow their copy of the film to be lent out for restoration. In October 1992, Universal released a restoration of this version of Dracula on VHS. Early home video copies of the film sold beyond the expectations of the Universal in the early 1990s. The film was released on DVD in 1999 and again in 2004 as part of the 2004 "Complete Legacy Edition". In 2012, Universal mounted a major restoration of both Browning's and Melford's Dracula for the Blu-ray release. In 2015, the Library of Congress selected the film for preservation in the National Film Registry, finding it "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant". Reception Among contemporary reviews, an anonymous reviewer in the Los Angeles Times commented that the film was "replete with the same thrills that characterized the original stage play" and that Count Dracula was "excellently portrayed by Carlos Villarias". The review noted that George Melford's direction was "unusually good, except for some parts, which tend to be slightly episodic in form. This has been offset by the splendid dialogue of B. Fernandez Cue, who has been responsible for not a few of the better adaptations". The first major analysis of Dracula was by William K. Everson in his book More Classics of the Horror Film (1986). Everson proclaimed that the film made better use of sets like Dracula's Chambers than Browning's version and other events in the film such as the mist that appears out of Dracula's coffin and the sequence involving Dracula's travel to England. Everson also noted the "surprisingly erotic" qualities of the leading actress Lupita Tovar. David J. Skal's book Hollywood Gothic (1990) which included footage taken from a print of the film archived at the Cinemateca de Cuba, including footage missing from the Library of Congress copy that was screened in 1977. Skal concluded that the film was superior to Browning's film. Variety reviewed the video on its VHS release, commenting that Melford's film was "far less ambitious", noting fewer dolly and tracking shots. The review also commented that Melford's film felt more stage bound and its longer running time led to more "ponderous pauses and plodding dialog". Tom Weaver reviewed the film in Fangoria cautioning viewers on stating which film is better, proposing that "is it actually a better film than Lugosi's, or will it just seem