Sherlock Holmes

Another Hollywood Evisceration of a Classic
Rating:1 out of 5 stars
If you have actually read and love Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s immortal characters, then I can sum up this review by saying: DON’T WATCH THIS MOVIE! You may run the risk of an apoplectic fit.

Apparently, Holmes is a short, filthy, scruffy, drunken twit who rummages through Watson’s medical bag to drink his anesthetic for cataract surgery (which would have been cocaine, in the Victorian era). Yes, SH did use injectable cocaine, however I found this insinuation he was a desperate addict rather unsettling. It is also implied Holmes has had an illicit affair with Irene Adler — whose character is moderately chafing in this movie. Best of all, the Doctor, instead of being awed by Holmes, despises him. Oh, and Baker Street was a filthy cesspool, Holmes and Mrs. Hudson appear to be mortal enemies, etc. It was nothing more than a parody of Conan Doyle’s characters, using name recognition and the older than dirt Sherlock Holmes fandom to make a buck.

For everyone else…

My main qualm with the movie was how disjointed it appeared from beginning to end. One has only to watch the nigh on a dozen trailers to realize how many scenes did not make the final cut. Unfortunately, someone down at editing did a botched job of seaming these holes, and it showed, painfully. Especially in regards to that entire Holmes/Adler side plot. It was confusing at best, but mostly just annoying. The plot was thin, outdated, and ridiculous. I enjoy a good occult-ish themed flick as much as anyone else, but the operative word here is GOOD. This reeked. Again, I had the feeling the flow was disjointed, that scenes were added or omitted without enough forethought to continuity. This only detracted from an already lame plot.

I could go on about the dumbed down dialogue which borrowed heavily from quotes out of the original stories to spice up bad writing. Or the entirely overdone action sequences that were sorely out of place and had me bored to tears. Or how Hollywood bastardized two of the most beloved literary characters to modernize and re-invent them for greed & 21st century audiences.

In the end, it was a mildly entertaining steam-punk movie, but not one that was able to hold my attention for very long. After a while it became grating on the nerves to sit through, due to the combination of terrible writing, plotting, drawn out slow-mo ‘action’ scenes, mediocre acting, and the disgrace this was to Holmes & Watson.

Sherlock Holmes
Rating:1 out of 5 stars
The product was very poor, as there was a malfunction wit the audio. I offered to get an exchange for a working copy and even pay the extra post, but was given a full refund instead.

Sherlock Holmes
Rating:5 out of 5 stars
This was a great movie. I love Robert Downey, Jr. He uses a mix of comedy and serious acting to bring his character to life. I would recommend this movie. It is set in the same era as the original Sherlock Holmes movies with just a little update and quirks.

Basil Rathbone rolls over in his grave with new depiction of Sherlock Holmes as wacky Bohemian
Rating:2 out of 5 stars
*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Here is the newfangled Sherlock Holmes, courtesy action director Guy Ritchie. Ritchie initially wanted to cast a younger actor for the part of Sherlock Holmes but settled on Robert Downey Jr., after envisioning the new Holmes as a Bohemian artist type. This fit right in with Downey’s belief that Holmes is supposed to be “quirky and kind of nuts”, an interpretation which was suggested to him by his real life wife, Susan Downey. What appealed to Downey about this interpretation of Holmes is “quirky and kind of nuts” is the way he views himself!

Now I have no problem with Holmes being depicted as eccentric (which is precisely the way Sir Arthur Conan Doyle conceived him) but there was also a certain meticulousness and dignity which Downey runs away from in his interpretation. Start with Downey’s unshaved look throughout the picture–would the meticulous Holmes allow himself to look so scruffy while everyone else in proper Victorian society is so well manicured? Despite his amazing powers of deductive reasoning and ability to solve cases, Victorian society would never accept a Holmes that refuses to conform to its basic norms. I’m also thinking of the ludicrous opening scene at the Baker Street apartment where Holmes is shooting bullets into the wall in an attempt to develop some kind of early ‘silencer’. Can you imagine Basil Rathbone, from the original Sherlock Holmes movies, shooting at the walls and terrorizing his landlady and the other lodgers in the building?

And isn’t it beneath Holmes to be so petty in his relationship to his perennial sidekick, Watson? The scene at the restaurant where he brings Watson’s fiancé to tears and causes her to walk out, just seems so out of character for Holmes. Yes, he’s supposed to be cold and insensitive at times, but that happens when he becomes absorbed in attempting to solve his cases. It should not apply to a social gathering where he boorishly undermines the relationship between a close colleague and his fiancé.

The childish interplay between Holmes and Watson goes on for a good two thirds of the movie. I fail to see the humor in such scenes as inside the carriage when Holmes teases Watson by keeping the money he won gambling the night before (Watson of course is an inveterate gambler) and Watson then (tit for tat) throws Holmes’ vest outside the carriage window. Both Robert Downey and Jude Law both seem to offer up the same over the top interpretations for Holmes and Watson and I found I couldn’t distinguish very well between the two characters. I much prefer the buffoonish Nigel Bruce as Watson opposite Basil Rathbone in those old movies since at least the contrast between the two was evident.

Ritchie’s plot runs into a great deal of trouble for the first two thirds of the movie due to slow pacing. There’s an attempt to pick things up with a couple of action scenes which grow tiresome. I had no trouble with the early scene of Downey as action hero in the boxing ring which Ritchie claims is derived from the original Sherlock Holmes stories; but then there’s a long drawn out sequence where Holmes and Watson battle an evil giant and then end up destroying a ship while in dry dock. Then there’s the scene with Irene Adler interacting with a hidden Professor Moriarty; we end up seeing the scene twice since Holmes ends up explaining what he deduces from his confrontation with the evil Professor to Watson.

Nor is the rest of the story very exciting leading to the climax. Reordan, the man Adler has been looking for, turns up dead in Lord Blackwell’s coffin, despite Blackwell being hanged earlier for the murder of five women. Then Blackwell murders his father who heads the Temple of the Four Orders.

Finally things begin to pick up when Holmes confronts Home Secretary Lord Coward. In one of the best scenes in the movie, Holmes tricks Coward into revealing that Blackwood and company intend to wipe out all members of the House of Lords. Holmes is initially brought to Coward in handcuffs but it’s later revealed that Inspector Lestrade has given Holmes the keys to escape. Lestrade, by the way, reminds me of the excellent late actor, Donald Pleasance, and ably acquits himself in the thankless role of second fiddle to Sherlock Holmes.

For those sticklers who find all of the evil Blackwell’s machinations to be completely implausible (such as how he manages evade detection in staging his own death by hanging), I cannot disagree; however, the film is not supposed to be taken too literally or seriously. Ritchie finally gets things moving at the climax and I liked how Holmes dispatches Blackwell on the under construction Tower Bridge. I’m not so sure however, how Irene Adler survives that fall after Blackwell pushes her off the bridge.

For purists such as myself, the scenes where Holmes uses his deductive reasoning (such as his ability to follow a carriage’s path while blindfolded) are quite welcome. Nonetheless, with Robert Downey choosing to play Holmes for a good part of the time as a lout who resembles a drunkard and a completely nondescript Watson who serves up no significant contrasts to his wily colleague, the new Sherlock Holmes lacks the main ingredient that has been found to be offered up by some of its predecessors: charm!

“Summary prognosis: unconscious in ninety seconds… Full faculty recovery: unlikely.” Blu ray review
Rating:4 out of 5 stars
Ahhh, what a breath of fresh air to a very stale character. Robert Downey Jr. brings the legend to life. This is the detective no one has ever seen before. Jude Law is also wonderful as Holmes’ trusted colleague, Dr. Watson. The story takes place in London, and centers around a supernatural plot led by Lord Blackwood. There is so much going on, that although some things are predictable it is still delivered to you in fine fashion. The negative reviews, which are few, all revolve around the way Sherlock is portrayed in this movie. They need to get over it, because this is the way Sherlock Holmes should be portrayed. Downey is witty and convincing as a brooding genius who can handle himself in a scrum. Well done! Looking forward to the sequel where he takes on Moriarty!

NOW FOR MY BLU RAY THOUGHTS: Stunning picture! A delight for HD enthusiasts. Also a real nice audio mix. SPECIAL FEATURES: Interesting and worth a look. FINAL THOUGHTS: A MUST OWN!

Great Movie!
Rating:5 out of 5 stars
I loved this movie even though it was quite different from the ones I grew up with. I grew up with Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce. I think it was great that Dr. Watson was not such a bumbling nit wit like he was betrayed before. It was also nice to see Sherlock with a love interest. Robert Downey Jr. was great as Sherlock.

Fab Sherlock
Rating:5 out of 5 stars
the delivery was very prompt. The movie was first rate I will order from them again.

Guy Ritchie Entertains Again
Rating:4 out of 5 stars
When my mother saw the first trailer for Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes, she scoffed and waved her hand at the screen in a gesture of pure aversion. I imagine many readers of the classic Arthur Conan Doyle stories had this same reaction, and I realize why. The trailers for the film actually do it a disservice by showing all the action and special effects and none of the intellectualism that the writers actually keep somewhat sacred from the source material. Its true that these loyalties are somewhat hidden beneath effects, but nevertheless, I not only liked Ritchie’s reimagining of the sly sleuth, but I applauded several times throughout the film.

Like all of Ritchie’s films, the plot is somewhat convoluted. Three people are credited under screenplay, which may be an indicator that this was a complex screen story to begin with. True enough, the small details of the film are vital, and the manic way that Ritchie directs serves this purpose strangely well, stripping away many pacing issues and much of the banality that could have come attached to this sort of project. As the movie begins, Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and Watson (Jude Law) manage to bring to justice some kind of black magic-cult leader named Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong) who is hanged for several mysterious murders around London. He then rises from the grave, and must be stopped before he fulfills his threatening plot against all of England. Meanwhile, Watson is in the process of retiring from his partnership with Holmes due to his erratic behavior and repellent lifestyle.

Of course, they must join together one last time to take down the nemesis Blackwood. In the process of doing so, they encounter Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams), a criminal and former lover of Holmes’ who ran off leaving him heartbroken. Robert Downey Jr. has excellent chemistry with both McAdams and Law, which is crucial in a film with such a confusing plot as this. The characters are very fun to listen to, particularly the bickering between Holmes and Watson, driven by brilliant actors. Downey Jr. is superb as usual here, bringing charm and whimsy while also maintaining Holmes’ boozy, fist aiming, somewhat depressed nature.

The production design is excellent here, particularly in the final showdown atop an unfinished tower bridge. To see the period placed in this context is truly fascinating. There are some wonderful Ritchie trademarks as well, and he uses all of his best hallmark shots, such as a slow-motion sequence involving a vast amount of explosives. All of these special effects, rather than burying the film’s more grounded aspects, simply compliment the subtle and terrific performances, and the complicated but enduring story.

Hans Zimmer’s excellent score is also noteworthy, as its banjos, accordions, harpsichords, tack pianos, drums and string sections stomp forth and chug along forcefully and confidently, denoting Holmes’ certainly that this is just another case that is, as Basil Rathbone’s portrayal once said, “Elementary, my dear Watson.” And, it turns out, my mom enjoyed the film.