Alicia I love this movie so much

ThiefHott Too much of everything

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

zorro2a OK Matt Frewer is no Jeremy Brett, but l feel there has been a lot of poor remarks about his portrayal of Holmes, l could not fault his accent he dressed well, and you must remember the actors like Charlton Heston and Edward Woodward have played Holmes and no one chastised them.The story is the same we all know it well, but the photography was stunning, the music added to the overall action, l have to mention the actor who played Watson, superb, a bit like Nigel Bruce from the 40's but not as bumbling, l have been a life long Holmes fan, raised on Basil Rathbone's Holmes, but not until Jeremy Brett has anyone come near the character as Conan Doyle wrote him, but l think Matt Frewer has done a good job and l would recommend anyone to see this film and make their own mind up 7 out of 10

micaofboca-1 You say you wonder how on earth they cast an American/Canadian actor as Holmes rather than a British one. I don't see your point. Sir Henry had been in Canada for long enough to have eradicated any vestiges of a British accent that might have (or might not have) lingered from his boyhood if indeed he had been educated in England although he might not have been schooled there). I've always looked for an American/Canadian accent (which are indistinguishable; I'm from upstate New York and the knooks speak like Yanks.) in any performance of this role. I'd be uncomfortable with Sir Henry speaking in a British accent. No indication of an English accent should have existed.

Trailrider Before I bought the DVD of this version of the "Hound of the Baskervilles" with Matt Frewer playing Holmes, I read the other user comments listed on the IMDB and I have to agree that the script was not very good and in fact, I found it to be somewhat poor in many respects. I also must mention that Jason London's performance as Sir Henry Baskerville was in my opinion dismal. He played the role as if the casting company went out in the street and asked the first guy they came across to please step in and take the role. I would think that Joe Namath could have done better but on the other hand maybe that is what London was trying to do. Maybe London was trying to put into the role such realism as a simple man pulled into a situation as an inheritor to a vast English estate that he played the role with a deadpan delivery of his lines. I wonder. On the other hand I was delighted with Matt Frewer's Sherlock Holmes. His physical appearance fit the role well and his particular charactaristics in stage presentation I think added an interesting twist to the Holmes character. As a Sherlockian, I like to see the differences that various actors give to the character. I would have liked to seen more of Frewer's Holmes in this film but the dismal script distorted and shortened the story so that the Holmes character is only seen in the first quarter of the film and then near the end of the film. In agreement with most of the other comments made on this version, If you are a film buff and a Sherlockian as I am, than this DVD is worth adding to your collection. If you are simply a fan of mystery films perhaps it is better for you to wait for this version to be rerun on TV or if you find it in your video rental store, the film is certainly worth the rental fee. Trailrider

juvenalxx 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!