As they say, times change. Dracula had a much more powerful subtext for the Renfield character, for instance. If you really wanted to try to adapt Dracula for a modern audience, you might have Renfield suffering from AIDS dementia. Syphilitic paresia was the original subtext.
In Victorian times, Dracula attacking Mina Harker in the Harker bedroom was enough, but a modern version should probably show Dracula naked (the clothes don't come through the door when he does the misty thing?) And so on and so forth.
Harker's decision to join Mina as a vampire was equivalent to forgiving an unfaithful wife who contracted syphilis. (I gather this is a kind of wishful projection on Bram Stoker's part?) The incredibly inept Coppola version of course made sure to make Harker unfaithful first, for some reason. Assuming they bothered with reasons, that is.
The thing is, the kinds of transgressiveness that propelled the horror in the 1890s simply are not going to resonate the same way now. Nonetheless vampires are about kinky sex. Hence the barely concealed admiration.