Basically, it has been done. And from what I'm reading, it's been done better. Not just in the 2000 made-for-TV movie and the book it was based on, but in the Castlevania video games. (Which is really sad because story has never been their strong point, but at least their Vlad was an asshole even as a human.) Honestly, how they keep throwing around the phrase "heroic tale" bothers me more than the historical inaccuracies. Even if I completely ignore the historical figure of Vlad Tepes and focus solely on Stoker's portrayal of Dracula, it does not fit. Also that they didn't want to make a vampire film? Why would you decide to reboot Dracula and then say, "But oh no, we don't want it to be about vampires." (Of course, she keeps throwing around praise for Twilight, which was another awful vampire film that wasn't actually about vampires, so I'm not surprised.)
I'll probably still see it because I'm curious enough, but I'm preparing for disappointment.
Edit: I guess what I'm really trying to say is this. There is a lot of talk about how we're inundated with reboots and origin stories as of late, but another trend has been to take a story and tell the villain's side. I'm a strong believer in the concept that the villain is always a hero in his own mind and I often gravitate towards grey area villains more than heroes. Most of my favorite supervillains are the ones constantly stuck in the face-heel revolving door. But even I am getting sick of it at this point. Why can't we have a bad guy who is bad for purely selfish reasons? It's sad when they've become so rare that I actually start to miss them.
The producer states straight out that this isn't meant for people wanting to see a movie about Vlad Tepes. But it doesn't seem to be for people who want to see a movie about Dracula, either. So I'm left wondering who they think the audience is.