In the last two seasons of the Jeremy Brett "Sherlock Holmes" stories several two hour versions were written that were not really that good. Only one, THE MASTER BLACKMAILER, proved well done, because it illustrated the effects of the blackmail on society victims. It also was helped by Robert Hardy's performance as Charles Augustus Milverton, the subject of the story. But the version of THE MAZARIN STONE (actually combined with THE THREE GARRIDEBS), and the insane version of THE NOBLE BACHELOR called THE ELLIGIBLE BACHELOR demonstrated the obvious: whatever the weaknesses of his stories at their worst, as in the final collection, Conan Doyle was better at writing his stories than a bunch of screenplay writers for television.
THE LAST VAMPYRE is another failure (I've given it a "5" for some of the performances, but just for that). It is based on a story called THE ADVENTURE OF THE SUSSEX VAMPIRE. Please note Conan Doyle used the modern spelling of the word, not the spelling of the 17th or 18th Century. THE SUSSEX VAMPIRE is a unique story in the Holmes canon because it is the only time that Conan Doyle decided to take his best know creations (Holmes and Watson) and have them deal with the supernatural. The story was published in the 1920s, but it may have been written earlier. Doyle had a habit of writing stories and putting them aside if he felt them inferior to his best work, but by 1921 or so he was committed to his personal crusade to such an extent that he did not really care if the stories he handed out were so good as his best anymore.
The irony of this attitude is that by 1921 Conan Doyle was committed to his support of "spiritualism" and other forms of "occult" issues. It is with this in mind that the basic contradiction of this story pops up. Homes and Watson get a letter from one Robert Ferguson, an old school chum of Watson's, who is upset at recent activities in his home. He has caught his second wife apparently sucking the blood of their baby son. He is asking Holmes to look into it. Naturally Holmes has to look at all possible explanations, and asks for the volume of his research files dealing with the letter "V" for "Vampire". Soon we get a look at how he files things (one "Victor Lynch" is filed under "V", as is Holmes' account of the "Voyage of the "Gloria Scott"", which is the subject of an earlier story by Watson). Finally he finds the entry for "Vampire". He reads a bit of it to himself, and one can see him get annoyed. He flings down the volume of his files, and calls the material rubbish. Finally he tells Watson that his detective agency has its feet on the ground and is not swayed by such nonsense.
See what I mean? How could the Conan Doyle of 1921 have written such a sensible comment, and still championed the "occult"? Unless, of course, the creative Conan Doyle somehow managed to separate himself from the crusading Conan Doyle. We'll probably never quite know how this happened.
The story goes into Holmes and Watson visiting the Fergusons, observing the lady of the household, her love for the infant, and the activities of others in the house, including the older half-brother of the baby Jackie. Eventually Holmes figures out what is the truth in the situation, and suggests a sensible solution to Ferguson.
Now aside from the Fergusons and Holmes and Watson, no other plot line was dragged into this story. It concentrated on the problem, the investigation, the solution, and the way to eradicate the problem from reoccurring. While not the best story in the Canon, THE ADVENTURE OF THE SUSSEX VAMPIRE was a good story and a reasonably intelligible one.
Not so THE LAST VAMPYRE. The screenplay writers suggested that there was an outside influence on the perpetrator - a mysterious man who has moved to the Sussex village the Fergussons live in. The man (Roy Marsden) always wears black, and rarely appears in the daylight. He is from a family with a sinister reputation in the village, involving "vampirism", and when he is confronted by one of the villagers he stares at the man, who suddenly is vomiting up blood and dies.
Now that interesting incident never appeared in Conan Doyle. It might have appeared elsewhere, but it has nothing to do with the story called THE ADVENTURE OF THE SUSSEX VAMPIRE. Nor does the subsequent fate of Marsden's character, or of two of the principles in the story. In fact it becomes a kind of ridiculous updating of some lesser Jacobean tragedy with all kinds of corpses littering the stage. The conclusion ends with a character going insane and dying as a result. Believe me, the original conclusion was far more calm, and - as said before - much more sensible.
THE LAST VAMPYRE is another failure (I've given it a "5" for some of the performances, but just for that). It is based on a story called THE ADVENTURE OF THE SUSSEX VAMPIRE. Please note Conan Doyle used the modern spelling of the word, not the spelling of the 17th or 18th Century. THE SUSSEX VAMPIRE is a unique story in the Holmes canon because it is the only time that Conan Doyle decided to take his best know creations (Holmes and Watson) and have them deal with the supernatural. The story was published in the 1920s, but it may have been written earlier. Doyle had a habit of writing stories and putting them aside if he felt them inferior to his best work, but by 1921 or so he was committed to his personal crusade to such an extent that he did not really care if the stories he handed out were so good as his best anymore.
The irony of this attitude is that by 1921 Conan Doyle was committed to his support of "spiritualism" and other forms of "occult" issues. It is with this in mind that the basic contradiction of this story pops up. Homes and Watson get a letter from one Robert Ferguson, an old school chum of Watson's, who is upset at recent activities in his home. He has caught his second wife apparently sucking the blood of their baby son. He is asking Holmes to look into it. Naturally Holmes has to look at all possible explanations, and asks for the volume of his research files dealing with the letter "V" for "Vampire". Soon we get a look at how he files things (one "Victor Lynch" is filed under "V", as is Holmes' account of the "Voyage of the "Gloria Scott"", which is the subject of an earlier story by Watson). Finally he finds the entry for "Vampire". He reads a bit of it to himself, and one can see him get annoyed. He flings down the volume of his files, and calls the material rubbish. Finally he tells Watson that his detective agency has its feet on the ground and is not swayed by such nonsense.
See what I mean? How could the Conan Doyle of 1921 have written such a sensible comment, and still championed the "occult"? Unless, of course, the creative Conan Doyle somehow managed to separate himself from the crusading Conan Doyle. We'll probably never quite know how this happened.
The story goes into Holmes and Watson visiting the Fergusons, observing the lady of the household, her love for the infant, and the activities of others in the house, including the older half-brother of the baby Jackie. Eventually Holmes figures out what is the truth in the situation, and suggests a sensible solution to Ferguson.
Now aside from the Fergusons and Holmes and Watson, no other plot line was dragged into this story. It concentrated on the problem, the investigation, the solution, and the way to eradicate the problem from reoccurring. While not the best story in the Canon, THE ADVENTURE OF THE SUSSEX VAMPIRE was a good story and a reasonably intelligible one.
Not so THE LAST VAMPYRE. The screenplay writers suggested that there was an outside influence on the perpetrator - a mysterious man who has moved to the Sussex village the Fergussons live in. The man (Roy Marsden) always wears black, and rarely appears in the daylight. He is from a family with a sinister reputation in the village, involving "vampirism", and when he is confronted by one of the villagers he stares at the man, who suddenly is vomiting up blood and dies.
Now that interesting incident never appeared in Conan Doyle. It might have appeared elsewhere, but it has nothing to do with the story called THE ADVENTURE OF THE SUSSEX VAMPIRE. Nor does the subsequent fate of Marsden's character, or of two of the principles in the story. In fact it becomes a kind of ridiculous updating of some lesser Jacobean tragedy with all kinds of corpses littering the stage. The conclusion ends with a character going insane and dying as a result. Believe me, the original conclusion was far more calm, and - as said before - much more sensible.