the audience applauded

So much average

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

The acting in this movie is really good.

In London, Sherlock Holmes (Matt Frewer) and Dr. Watson (Kenneth Welsh) are visited by the countryside Dr. Mortimer (Gordon Masten). He tells that Sir Baskerville has officially died of heart attack; however there are rumors and he believes that he was murdered by the notorious devil hound. Dr. Mortimer asks whether Sherlock Holmes would accept to investigate the case and also provide protection against the curse to the heir Sir Henry Baskerville (Jason London). Dr. Watson travels with Dr. Mortimer to meet Sir Henry and protect him while Holmes stays in London. Will they resolve the case?"The Hound of the Baskervilles" is a Canadian version of the famous novel of the same title made for television. The high quality cinematography and the good screenplay are partially wasted with the unbearable arrogance of Sherlock Holmes performed by Matt Frewer, the worst Sherlock Holmes ever. Jason London is also miscast but his performance is satisfactory. My vote is six.Title (Brazil): "Demônio do Pântano" ("Demon of the Swamp")

Hound of the Baskervilles, The (2000) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Decent adaptation of the Arthur Conan Doyle book has Holmes (Matt Frewer) and Watson (Kenneth Welsh) trying to determine if Sir Henry (Jason London) is being stalked by a family curse or something human. This Canadian, made-for-TV version of the famous story wasn't nearly as bad as I was expecting and it actually had a pretty good look and feel to it. I think director Gibbons perfectly nails the atmosphere of the story and manages to get you right into the mood of the dark tale. The movie does a pretty good job at keeping everything moving quite well even if you've seen previous versions of the story done (much better by Fox and Hammer). Many fans of Holmes often complain that they don't like the fact that he's missing from so much of this story but I think they won't mind it here. I'm really not familiar with Frewer's work as an actor but I didn't care for him at all here and I must say that the film suffers whenever he's on the screen. I'm really not sure if he thought he was playing some spoof or what but I found his performance to be almost comic like and it really didn't mix too well with any of the other actors and the type of performances they were giving. I also didn't believe for a second that he was some sort of brilliant mind and this here is something very important to believe when it comes to Holmes. I thought Welsh was extremely good as Watson and he certainly helped carry a lot of the film. London doesn't do the best job possible but he's not too bad. None of the other supporting players jumped out at me but none of them were bad or damaged the film. I do think the final thirty-minutes drag a little too slowly but if you've seen previous versions and want to try a new one then I don't think you'll mind this one. If you haven't seen any of the earlier versions then you will want to start there first and leave this one for later.

When i saw the promo for this i knew i had to see it. I've always liked Matt Frewer but i could not conceive of him as Sherlock Holmes. Matt Frewer as Sherlock Holmes? Come on! Maybe as inspector LeStrade but not Holmes. But, being a fan of the actor i thought i'd give it a try and i sat down eagerly to watch. Man, i was disappointed. My first thought was he had dealt a serious blow to his career or maybe he had lost it as an actor. His performance was abysmal. It reminded me of Richard Dreyfus's portrayal of Richard III in "Goodbye Girl". It was that bad. His Holmes was an effeminate smug superior clown. I am at a loss to see that they actually made more of these. I'll have to check them out to see if they improve.Now, i admit that I am a HUGE fan of the Jeremy Brett Holmes, so take that into account.On the positive side, the portrayal of Watson by Kenneth Walsh was fantastic. Very much in the new tradition established by David Burke and Edward Hardwicke in the Grenada version. It is nice to see Watson portrayed as a thoughtful, intelligent professional man, as a competent doctor and of strong character.Visually the movie is decent and if i had to toll it up i'd say it was worth watching but only just.By the way, having seen Matt Frewer in "Taken" i was reassured to see he is still the earnest and entertaining actor i believed he was.One minor disappointment - I cringed to see the deerstalker hat make an appearance. (i don't think Brett wears one once in the Grenada versions) Why is Holmes always pictured wearing one? I don't recall that he ever wears one in the stories.Jeremy Brett rules!

I don't know of any serious Sherlockian who would have any use for this abhorred mess! I have absolutely nothing good to say -- it wastes a lot of time, talent and money. And now Matt Frewer is doing sequels! The mind boggles!By the way, what kind of dog did they use in this version? Looked like a skipperdee!