A thing I forgot to mention is that the airforce officer character played by Hugh Grant is not in the Lair novel. The inspiration for this character may be inspired by the protagonist in The Lady of the Shroud. It is notable for being one of the first novels to describe air warfare. Although this was edited out in the first publication. The Wordsworth classics edition recently re-incorporated this passage.

Gonna look for Lady of the Shroud, thanks.

There are some common themes, namely the Fin de sicle decadance of the main antagonist, whose name in the novel is Arabella March. Except in the novel she does not seduce boy scouts but eats little village children, a fairly obvious metaphor for the class struggle in pre WWI Britain. Also she is the White Worm, or Wyrm, or dragon and can metamorphise back and forth between a thin white noblewoman and then this dragon which is white, has arms and shining green eyes.
There is also a fairly strong sexual undertone to the whole story. It is very misogynistic. The protagonist is filling a slimy lair, the living place of the white worm, with sand and then it is fed electricity which explodes the worm in a bloody mess. it is speculated that Stoker, who was an eager visitor to brothels may have had syphilis in the third stage. This would also explain the wierd illogical structure of the story and its seemingly random nature as the disease attacks the brain.
It could be that the movie is akso inspired by his third most well known story, the Lady of the Shroud. As this story has a female vampire who lives in a big castle. It is important to know that the noblewoman in Lair is not a vampire.

No. The only thing that Bram Stoker's book and Ken Russell's film have in common is the title. Having read the book and seen the film, both several times, the film is one of the few films that I have found that outshines the book upon which it was based.

As much as I've loved some of Stoker's work, never did read this story. And if it's crap, glad I never bothered! As for the film, no it's got
nothing
to do with Stoker's tale, but the film is, nonetheless, a delicious indulgence!

You got that right!

Just as well, the book is awful! the heroes are just as bigger vile racists as the villians in the book, and many people confuss that it's not one of Stoker's better piece of work.