That this 2002 Canadian TV movie is based on a made-up Holmes story rather than a canon one should be a warning in itself; this turns out to be a schlocky and entirely befuddled production that has little to do with the original stories. Purists will no doubt find themselves outraged by the antics of the producers, which reduce the story elements to their most basic level.The rest of us are left amused by a film which comes across as a cheesy B-movie instead of a classy Holmes adaptation. The entire story is set in what looks like a medieval monastery, with the sweaty monks at the mercy of a vampire killer. Wait until you see the costume! It's all very silly and of course nothing like the real Holmes.Matt Frewer starred as the Victorian sleuth in four of these movies and he portrays the detective as an upper class twit. Let's just say that his acting is entertaining for all the wrong reasons. I'm not sure why North Americans have to put on an affected RP accent every time they play a Brit; it's a bit like a Brit supposing that all Americans speak in Southern drawls, which couldn't be further from the truth. Anyway, THE CASE OF THE WHIECHAPEL VAMPIRE is a mess, but also still marginally better than the appalling BBC production of SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE CASE OF THE SILK STOCKING with Rupert Everett.

From the opening few seconds it is immediately obvious that this is a TV movie. The production values scream this out. The music and sets all show their limitations pretty clearly, while the acting on display is very much of television standard. So from the get-go you are at least under no false impressions of the scope of this one and that's probably a good thing in the long run because this Sherlock Holmes mystery doesn't really ever ascend above the level of mediocre.The story is about a series of murders at a monastery seemingly committed by a vampire in the same area as Jack the Ripper operated. One of the monastic Brothers believes that it is the work of a demon he claims to have encountered before in British Guyana called Desmondo. The 'agnostic' Holmes is sceptical from the outset regarding this explanation and sets about applying his famed logic to solving the murder-mystery.Apparently this is not actually based on an Arthur Conan Doyle original story. This may go some way to explaining some of the more ambiguous supernatural material such as a possibly-maybe divine intervention moment towards the end. Despite a very promising set-up, it isn't a particularly exciting or well written story. The actor who played Holmes didn't seem right to me, on the other hand Dr Watson was portrayed in a textbook manner. But overall, the acting was sub-par amongst the side characters, with the character who played the police inspector spouting a truly dreadful 'Scottish' accent. Despite all this, it was an acceptable enough way of spending ninety minutes and I was interested enough to discover the solution to the mystery. But overall there was little in the way of actual atmosphere or inspiration in this one.

Matt Frewer's four films for Hallmark television are never likely to budge memories of the series made for Granada in the 1980s and 1990s; however, they are meant to appeal to a young audience and in this respect, they probably succeed.Frewer is saddled with a comedy deerstalker, the worst British accent since Robert Duvall played Watson in 'The Seven-Per-Cent Solution', and an annoying range of tics, smirks and general non-Holmes type behaviour. But he does have a rather good Watson in Kenneth Welsh who is a more serious version of Nigel Bruce from the 1940s Holmes films, so there are some compensations.The story here is nothing to do with Conan Doyle's 'The Sussex Vampyre'; it concerns a group of monks who are slowly being killed by what appears to be a vampire bat - each are found slumped and cold and bleeding from two wounds to the neck. Is there something supernatural going on, or, as Holmes believes, it this an inside job? The filming is actually not that bad - Canada passes for Victorian England, and set dressing isn't that inaccurate. With a better actor in the lead, these could be worthy additions to the screen Holmes. It's just that Frewer's version doesn't work - unless you see him as a kind of cartoon, comedy, superhero Holmes.If you are a Holmes completist, then of course you will want to watch these. But otherwise, you won't miss anything by staying away.

The skeptical Sherlock Holmes (Matt Frewer) and Dr. Watson (Kenneth Welsh) investigate some deaths in the monastery of Whitechapel attributed to a vampire. Sherlock Holmes refuses to believe in any type of action from the supernatural or any coincidence. As usual, there is a very logical conclusion of the story. This is the type of very verbalized movie, basically with no action. The viewer feels like being in a theater, with a stage on the screen. Therefore, the running time could be shorter. The viewer may also become a tired, especially if he is not fluent in English and needs to read the subtitles. But it is a good plot and the mystery and its resolution keep the attention along the whole story. My vote is six.