In all honesty, Karloff is probably the overall better actor. That said, Lugosi wins hands just simply due to Dracula. One of the greatest horror performances Ive ever seen, even though some of his other films arent that great.

Part of me wants to say that comparing Karloff to Lugosi is akin to comparing apples and oranges, because they both had really really unique elements that they brought to the screen.

Lugosi's major problem was, in fact, Dracula, because in everyone's mind, including his own, he was alway going to be Dracula. Whereas Karloff could play a character, play it well, and then give equally to another role.

Exactly.

And I can't choose because, as Haunted said, they're apples and oranges.

Think about it. What are the two major Gothic novels that have shaped our notions of horror or at the very least are the most famous in the English literary world? Frankenstein (Mary Shelley) and Dracula (Bram Stoker).

How cool would it have been to be chosen to play the "Moster" Frankenstein or Dracula. Karloff was like "Hell yeah!" but he didn't did stop there. He went on, took off the make up, and could take on anything else with as much gusto.

Lugosi, and Goddess knows I love 'im, could never leave that part behind. The cloak, the hair, the make up, were always a ghostly part of what ever wardrobe he was wearing. Hell, he was buried in that attire.

(For the love of all good films, don't jump down my throat), but Lugosi's thrall reminds me a bit like Jack Nicolson. Sure he's played some good roles, but he always fills his character with (except in Easy Rider) with the same wicked, smarmy, devilish, cruelty. He could be playing Jesus, and he'd still act like an asshole.

It's called typecasting, as we all know. Many many actors fall into that pit, and can't get out.

You're correct, to some extent, about Lugosi, but you go too far when you say he could "never" leave the part of Dracula behind, and the cloak and hair and make up were "always" a part of his every wardrobe.

Take a look at Lugosi's performance as Igor in SON OF FRANKENSTEIN and GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN -- wonderfully creepy and absolutely nothing like Dracula. He also did a nice job with more sympathetic characters in THE BLACK CAT and THE INVISIBLE RAY. In short, he wasn't quite the one-note wonder some would make him out to be.

Nonono... I'm saying that Dracula was alway on his mind. I think that he sort of figured that it was his best work, instead of really giving into his other roles. Maybe, I'm wrong. It's been a while since I've seen THE BLACK CAT. (Perhaps worth watching again for research on this topic, though).

lugosi was way sexier :p

Yes, he should have been Im-Ho-Tep in THE MUMMY. I couldn't buy Karloff's eternal love for the leading lady, but I would have believed it with Lugosi.

with lugosi any thing is possible;)

Karloff vs. Lugosi
 

Lugosi rocks. Karloff has his place and I respect his roles, but who else could you hear saying "chidren of the night what music they make". That line always gives me chills. :[