Your thoughts about both movies mirror my own almost exactly, Z-F; however, I will go a few steps farther on each.
Bram Stokers Dracula: I think Keanu Reeves was woefully miscast as Jonathan Harker. His role more than anyone elses,was totally out of place. He can't feign the English accent very well, and his outing in Constantine proves this. I'm not 100% certain if this is his fault or director Francis Lawrences, but one only need go back and check out his former film where he played the part of an Englishman to see he was all wrong for the part. He did a great job as John Constantine, but not so as Jonathan Harker. Reeves is improving as an actor and slowly, painstakingly is getting away from the Ted Theodore Logan persona but hasn't quite made it. He definitely was still doing the Wyld Stallyns thing with Bram Stokers Dracula.
I also didn't care for the whole romantic angle going on between Dracula and Mina Harker. I suspect that whole thing was to draw more females into the Horror genre by giving them something they're more accustomed to, all the while hiding it under the pretext that the reason why Dracula was doomed to roam the earth a Vampire was because he cursed God for letting his love Elizabeta die. I'm not trying to sound sexist here, but if you check out what sort of fiction sells the most in the United States, Romance tops the list and I don't believe anything else comes close. If Julia Roberts had been cast as the female lead, just imagine how much more bankroll it probably would have made.
The rest of the movie was a sight to behold. It looked great, especially all of the scenes that had to do with Transylvania. Oldman owned that movie and was the closest interpretation to the Stoker character than any like you stated before, Z. Interesting tidbit of info: Popular exotic babe, Monica Belucci was one of Dracula's Vampire brides.
Interview With the Vampire: I also thought the movie would have been enchanced by the trip to Romania where the revenant was found in the village's graveyard. I find very little wrong with this film, despite that it was based on the Anne Rice book (I also can't handle Rice's style of writing or her whiny, candy-ass Vampires) I am however a fan of Tom Cruise and even I thought he was all wrong for the role of Lestat de Lioncourt--that was until I saw the film. He played Lestat to perfection. Neil Jordan was wise to touch only on what he had to, and leave the fat on the cutting room floor or in the book. Jordan directed another film I think is worth checking out The Company of Wolves I can't say the same for The Crying Game or We're No Angels. The only complaint I have with the film and it is a very minor one, was that every single one of the actors from Cruise to Kirsten Dunst were too old for their roles. Like I said it is a minor complaint, one hardly worth mentioning as the whole movie was acted so well.
I'm afraid I have to roll with Neil Jordan's film as it had fewer weak points than Coppola's outing. Both are great films, but Interview With the Vampire is slightly better.
Bram Stokers Dracula: 2 Interview With the Vampire: 1