Apart from "crap", I'm not sure what to call this film.
On the (Australian) DVD cover the film's title is Dracula 2000. On the disc I shoved in my DVD player the film's title is Dracula 2000, but when the film starts the opening credits boldly declare "Wes Craven presents Dracula 2001". For a moment I thought I must have accidentally picked up the sequel to Dracula 2000. I hadn’t. I later learned that this film was released as Dracula 2000 in the US, but then re-titled Dracula 2001 for its UK release. Obviously the distributors of the (Australian) DVD simply didn't care enough about this little turd to make sure the DVD cover art matched the film's titles.
OK, so apart from the film's identity crisis, what's wrong with it? Pretty much everything. It looks nice, but the script is so uninspired it feels like you're watching a regurgitated composite of every other vampire movie ever made. If you're going to make yet another vampire movie I think you need to bring something new to the table, and Dracula 2001 categorically fails to do so.
After the similarly disastrous Vampire In Brooklyn I'm surprised Wes Craven was so willing to lend his name to another dud vampire movie.
Whatever this film is called in your country, avoid it.