Sherlock Holmes

Sherlock Holmes

Sherlock Holmes - Directed by Guy Ritchie, starring Robert Downey, Jr., Jude Law, Rachel McAdams, and Mark Strong - Rated PG-13

This fun take on Holmes and Watson deserves a Kurgan.



Who knew Sherlock Holmes was so cool? If you’re like me, then the idea that comes to mind when you hear the famous detective’s name is that of a middle-aged man with a funny hat, a pipe, and an uncanny ability to solve complicated crimes by simply paying close attention to every detail. That doesn’t mean that director Guy Ritchie’s new version of Holmes is an unfaithful adaptation of the beloved Sir Arthur Conan Doyle creation. After doing some research (nothing major, just a quick read through of Sherlock’s Wikipedia page), I found that Holmes was an accomplished bare knuckle boxer and he had an eccentric personality. It’s just that Ritchie and his many screenwriters (five are credited) focused on the fighting and the eccentricity. That’s not to say that the deductive reasoning is ignored, however.

Sherlock Holmes is still all about an elaborate crime that Sherlock (Robert Downey, Jr.) and his ever faithful sidekick, Dr. Watson (Jude Law), must solve. Lord Blackwood (the continually impressive Mark Strong) has just been caught dabbling in the dark arts and has been sentenced to hang. Everything seems to be going smoothly. He is executed and Watson confirms his death, but the next day Blackwood is alive and plotting some major changes in England.

The story is interesting and nicely action packed, but what makes or breaks this film is the different take on the characters. Robert Downey, Jr. is very entertaining as the quick witted Holmes. His back and forth with Watson make for the most enjoyable moments in the film. The duo makes a first rate odd couple and the filmmakers made a wise choice by throwing us in the middle of their partnership rather than the beginning. It would have been boring to see yet another origin story about an already well-known set of characters. The pacing of the film actually plays like a sequel. It assumes we are familiar with the characters and just throws you right into a new adventure.

Back to the acting: Downey is funny and all, but his delivery takes some getting used to. His rapid fire delivery works great in other films, but he seems to be mumbling at times in this film and the British accent doesn’t help, either. It was only an issue for me early in the film, though; by the end, I was able to understand all of his lines. Surprisingly, I found Jude Law to be the most entertaining member of the cast. He’s turned in a number of quality roles over the years, but he’s rarely had the chance to be truly funny. He’s not funny in the traditional sense, i.e. he doesn’t have gags or tell jokes. His humor comes from simply reacting to Holmes’s more erratic behavior. Law’s slightly feigned disgust with Holmes is hilarious and what could be a boring, plain scene becomes an amusing moment in the film.

It’s not all witty banter, though. Holmes and Watson see plenty of action; big budget action. A lot of it is played for laughs (like Holmes’s showdown with a giant) and that is for the best. Action set pieces are for movies like Transformers. Ritchie showcases his action in the few fight scenes and a slow motion explosion scene. I mention the slow motion because that’s been an aspect of most of Ritchie’s films, notably the boxing scenes in Snatch. I’m kind of a sucker for his use of slow motion so I loved every detailed second of the scenes.



A Guy Ritchie film is not only marked by his use of slow motion, though. This may be Ritchie’s most mainstream film to date, but he still manages to put some style in there, though it’s never overbearing. I don’t think that Ritchie necessarily compromised his style of filmmaking here or anything, I just think that he and the screenwriters knew what a Sherlock Holmes film should be like. The audience doesn’t need sensory overload, or quick cuts, or long sequences set to catchy music. The audience for this film should be expecting an elaborate crime in which small clues are used to solve it and that is what provides the most pleasing aspect of the film.

When things are explained by Holmes while everyone else is clueless, it doesn’t seem forced or ridiculous (at least it doesn’t seem ridiculous in the movie world). In other words, you shouldn’t come away feeling cheated by any explanation. I thought the film covered all of its bases and if you pay close attention, you can play detective as you watch. When Holmes is at a crime scene, scouring the evidence, you should keep your eyes peeled. Like any interesting work, there is a reason for everything that is shown on the screen. Maybe you’ll be able to piece some things together, and maybe you’ll need Holmes to explain it all to you. Either way, you’ll be glad you spent your time on a case with Sherlock Holmes.

Eric Harris - www.canneltoncritic.com

Last updated: 2010-05-10 02:54:16 by user06

Sherlock Holmes un film de Guy Ritchie

First  of all, the story of Sherlock Holmes has been brought to the screen so  many times and by so many great directors (Buster Keaton, Billy Wilder)  that for a long time nobody wanted to touch the myth. Anyhow, Guy  Ritchie (Snatch, Lock, Stock and  Two Smoking Barrels) was  the chosen one to bring back with an allstar cast the greatest  detective in London's History.

The movie opens with an action sequence planned  to immerge immediately the viewer into the film. As well planned and  spectacular as it is, the sequence destabilize us and we have to  concentrate onto the charaters to understand what really goes on. The  photography is really dark and we don't discern really well the actors  in the shadows. I must say, that the film is pretty dark all the time  and that sometimes it gives a good atmosphere for the scenes but other  times it's just too dark.  After the first sequence where Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and  Watson (Jude Law) capture Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong) the film slows  down a bit and the mise-en-scène of the story takes place. Lord Blackwood is hanged for black magic  and murders. The real story starts when the body of Lord Blackwood  disappears from his grave.  

The big  story of Sherlock Holmes is the  investigation of the criminal that we all attend. Also, it has the  subplots of love, friendship and stories that came before the main plot.  The relationship between Holmes and Watson is interresting and really  funny. They look like an old couple, well it's the classic friendship  story with the jokes and the relations like The Sting or Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. The two main actors complete well each other and I must  give a special mention to the vilain played by Mark Strong who was very  credible.

Sherlock Holmes is a funny film that is worth seing and that doesn't reinvent the  genre but that refresh the quality of what a blockbuster has to present  these days. The only thing that tickled me a little was the many action  scenes that felt to me as too many even if they were well  orchestrated...

http://cinephiliaque.blogspot.com/2010/01/sherlock-holmes-un-film-de-guy-ritchie.html

(Read Less...)

Recommendations: Le charme discret de la bourgeoisie, Duel

Sherlock Holmes

It's easy to see why such a fuss was made over this 'reboot' of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's classic detective stories. Not only does it star Robert Downey Jr. - arguably Hollywood's hottest property following the success of Iron Man - but it also pairs director Guy Ritchie with literary London's biggest export.

Downey plus Ritchie plus Conan Doyle surely has to equal success.

And it does, at least as far as pure entertainment goes. Sherlock Holmes is fast-paced, witty, exciting, and undeniably fun, and as long as you aren't expecting a considered puzzler in the vein of the old Basil Rathbone movies, this is as energetic a reimagining of the stories as we might have dared to hope for. Think of it as Indiana Jones relocated to 1890s London.

Having sung its praises, we should also point out that Sherlock Holmes never manages to rise above its rather basic ambitions, and the plot is so scarce that Conan Doyle will be turning in his grave. The decision to pit Holmes against a supernatural opponent makes it feel like a remake of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom - or, even worse, 1985's horribly misguided Young Sherlock Holmes - and there are so few genuine twists that you'll be pining for the intricate mysteries of the originals.

This is Holmes as an action hero, not a detective. And as exciting as that is, you can't help wishing that the screenplay had found room for a plot among all its chases and explosions.

Still, if it's fistfights, quips and dastardly villains that you want, then Sherlock Holmes certainly delivers. Robert Downey Jr. is gloriously eccentric as Holmes, while Jude Law is admirably solid - if a little whiney - as his sidekick Dr. Watson. Mark Strong does good work as villain Lord Blackwood too, although the story makes him so one-dimensional that he hardly seems a match for the dashing Holmes. At least he resists the urge to cackle when his evil plans come together.

Guy Ritchie looks comfortable with his material, and while not everyone will be impressed by his visceral, blunt directing style, it certainly brings a pleasing physicality to the action sequences. He even resists the urge to litter the set with Cockney accents, which is a blessing.

With plans already underway for a sequel, it seems likely that Conan Doyle's Holmes may end up as an unlikely new action hero for the 21st century. Let's hope that they at least give him a mystery to unravel next time around. The game is afoot.

3/5

Sherlock Holmes: Downy/Law Shine, Ritchie Gets Too Excited

If you want to spice up something that’s been done before then you need to hand the reigns over to Guy Ritchie.  You might not get a complete product, but you know it will kick some ass in super slow motion.  Ritchie did just this with Sherlock Holmes. 
 
Robert Downey Jr. plays the 2009 reincarnation of the one and only Holmes.  After apprehending a ceremonial murderer of the dark arts, Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), Holmes dives deep into a work deprived coma.  It isn’t helping that his brother in arms Dr. John Watson (Jude Law) is moving out.  Watson intends to settle down.  This is something Holmes doesn’t necessary like as he promptly insults Watson’s fiancé resulting in a glass of wine to the face.
 
What saves Holmes from spiraling down a deep drug filled hole is that Lord Blackwood has requested him before he is set to be hung.  Blackwood confesses that there will be three more murders at his hands and that there’s nothing Holmes can do about it.  Those are big words coming from a man about to be hung.  Following the execution Dr. Watson pronounces him dead and the story ends…or does it?  Reports that Blackwood has arisen from the dead begin to appear and Sherlock Holmes is put on the case to make sure the Lord’s prophetic words don’t come true.
 
I must admit that I didn’t know much about Sherlock Holmes aside from the catchphrase “elementary my dear Watson,” which Guy Ritchie promptly threw out..  After some thorough investigative work (thank you Wikipedia) I found that the character really wasn’t much different than Downey’s interpretation.  This is surprising considering that he is portrayed as a drug addict who fights in back alley brawls for money and is someone I found to be borderline obnoxious at times.  However the character grows on you.  Part of the reason is because of Downey’s relationship with Law.  The two really do seem like brothers and the investigation becomes that much more adventurous as we join them.  Blackwood serves as a great villain despite his lack of screen time.  Of all the characters I might have wished I had gotten more from him even though he is indirectly involved throughout the film.
 
Of course I wouldn’t want anymore of Blackwood if it meant the movie was longer.  This one is LONG.  Even at a runtime of only 128 minutes it felt closer to three hours than two.  The action sequences sped the film up which made the downtime seem that much longer.  Speaking of action scenes there’s a lot of them and many of them are quite ridiculous.  In one scene Holmes dodges a couple of bullets at point blank range before jumping out of the fourth story of a building into a river headfirst.  Ritchie I love you, but someone really needed to calm him down.
 
Sherlock Holmes might lose your attention late in the game, but it still brings the character to life in a way only Guy Ritchie can do. 

(Read Less...)

Recommendations: Shutter Island, District 9 (Neill Blomkamp, 2009), Morning Glory

Last updated: 2010-04-12 19:03:43 by jpgreenb

Sherlock Holmes

Downey Jr stars as Sherlock Holmes the super sleuthing loose cannon from the much loved novels and his side kick Watson (Holmes). After a black magic wielding killer is brought to justice by hanging and comes back to life Holmes is back on the case at the request of the local police in order to help solve the mystery. Meanwhile, Watson is quite ready to get married and move on from the adventures of sleuthing but every time he tries the tug of Holmes keeps bringing him back. Can they solve this one last mystery together before this sinister man takes over the world?

• I started out watching without subtitles but when I could barely understand the first word that came out of Downey's heavily English accented mouth I immediately put them on. I should've known better.
• The movie had great action and a great flow. It was 128 minutes but didn't feel too long at all.
• I enjoyed watching the little tug of war between Holmes and Watson (Law). Best buddies 'til the end but now that Watson is trying to settle down and move on you could tell that Holmes was very resistant and more then a little jealous of his new lady and his impending new life.
• The love interest role of Irene was played by the lovely Rachel McAdams. She did a great job as usual playing the tough girl.

5 Stars

Just Me

Sherlock Holmes (2009)FILM REVIEW :

I'm a big fan of Robert Downey, Jr., so I would have seen this even if I wasn't technically looking forward to it. Even so, I've been anticipating Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes for quite some time. I thought it'd be interesting to see a somewhat updated take on the literary hero. I was also interested in seeing what Rachel McAdams and (to a lesser extent) Jude Law had to offer. But time went on and reviews came in... that being said, I went to see Sherlock Holmes not having a true opinion. Unlike other films, I was somewhat indifferent walking into the auditorium. Most of the trailers were terrible, so that wasn't exactly a good foreboding... The film is a little over two hours, which is a pretty lengthy amount of time even if the film is good. I walked out wishing it had been longer. 

Detective Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey, Jr.) and assistant/doctor John Watson (Jude Law) have been on the trail of Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong). Blackwood is an occultist who has murdered several women. When the two detectives find him, he is placed in prison and sentenced to death by hanging. The day before his death, Blackwood sends out for Holmes. When he arrives, he is told that Blackwood will come back to life after his hanging.

The morning after Blackwood's hanging, Holmes and Watson hear some disturbing news. Blackwood has in fact risen from the grave! It is up to Sherlock Holmes to stop him from furthering his havoc on Britain.

Holmes has some other things to deal with as well. Watson is engaged to Mary Morstan (Kelly Reilly), and Holmes must come to realize that he may be losing his longtime partner and best friend. He must also play mind games with Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams), the one person who has been able to outsmart him.

What could have been forgettable turned out to be one of my favorites of the year. Even though it wasn't perfect, I still had a great time watching it.

Director Guy Ritchie's highly stylized vision for Sherlock Holmes is arguably following in the footsteps of Christopher Nolan's work on The Dark Knight. The film itself isn't as impressive, and the directing isn't quite as fine-tuned, but like Nolan, he has redefined what people think of when they think of this hero. The refined and pipe-smoking idea of Sherlock Holmes has been replaced by a grungy and rough-and-tumble Sherlock.
 

When it comes to acting, Robert Downey, Jr. can do no wrong. He fits into any role that he wants to, but he hits some type of chord whenever he's playing people who are brilliant but arrogant. His portrayal of Sherlock Holmes is no different. The writing for the character is a tad bit weak, but with every single second of screen time Downey exemplifies Holmes more than most actors can throughout the course of an entire film. Arrogant and unsure, brilliant and simple, dependent and self-reliant, hateful and loving. All of these characteristics are shown thanks to Downey.
 

Jude Law makes a great John Watson. He masters the one thing needed to make the performance great: chemistry with Downey. If the actor playing John Watson didn't have that "bromantic" chemistry with Downey, the whole film would have been terrible. The humor would have been flat, and the relationship wouldn't have seemed real. However, Law and Downey do have that chemistry.
 

Rachel McAdams is a quite interesting case. The overall reaction to her performance has been mixed at best. I think that the problem wasn't the performance but the character. Although she has some minor significance in the film's story, her main function is to set up the inevitable sequel. That being said, I'll cut McAdams some slack. Personally, I think she did decent if not pretty good. Her British accent was halfhearted, and Irene Adler isn't even supposed to be British from what I know of her. Still, McAdams nailed the mannerisms and such, so I'll give her credit for that.
 

Mark Strong plays Lord Blackwood convincingly. From his first moments on screen you can tell that this guy is someone you wouldn't have a cup of tea with in the afternoon. However, Blackwood is a very one-dimensional character. He appears fairly sporadically; consequently, the audience doesn't really get to know he is the way he is. Although his character is clearly defined as "evil," the lack of characterization does make it a little hard for him to be seen as a strong villain
I think the film could have been a bit longer. I also had a big problem not knowing why Blackwood was so ruthless and evil. Those are my only real complaints, despite some minor problems with the writing and consequential underdevelopment of characters, . A great director and fantastic cast turned the film into something fantastic. Not perfect by any means, but perfect for what it is: a great time at the movies. I absolutely loved Sherlock Holmes.
Highly recommended
Rating: 8.5 out of 10 stars (4.5 out of 5 stars)


Photo Courtesies:
Sherlock Holmes: Filmofilia
Robert Downey, Jr.: FIlmofilia
Jude Law: Zap 2 It
Rachel McAdams: Video Detective
Mark Strong: ZU Guide

(Read Less...)

Julian Stark (pen name)<br />
<br />
Founder/Editor: Movies and Other Things<br />
<br />
http://julianstark-moviesandotherthings.blogspot.com

Watching on Wednesday: Sherlock Holmes

Title: Sherlock  Holmes
Type: Movie
Age Group: Teens +
Release Year: 2009
My Rating: 4.5/5

Sherlock Holmes. Everyone has heard of him at least once during their lifetime. Created by Arthur Conan Doyle, this super sleuth is one of the legendary fictional characters of all times. Now, you can watch Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) along with his partner Watson (Jude Law) in live action.

Holmes and Watson recently captured Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), a dark arts magician who has been causing trouble in London. Shortly after he is hanged and pronounced dead, Holmes is bored out of his mind in his cluttered apartment. He is dying for another grand mystery to solve. His wish is granted when Blackwood is witnessed to be alive when he walked out of his grave. If Holmes does not get to the bottom of this soon, England will be in trouble.

Originally, I wanted to watch Avatar 3D IMAX. Except when I arrived, it was completely sold out for the entire day. I wanted to watch Sherlock Holmes too but I was mad to have missed out on Avatar. However, my annoyance dissolved quite shortly after Sherlock Holmes started.

Thrown back into the late 19th century, the audience will be awed by the Victorian atmosphere and dressing style. Although Sherlock Holmes has a chock full of intense action, it still kept the English elegance and culture intact.

I absolutely love the characters!  Holmes, Watson, and Adler (Rachel McAdams) are all amazing with their distinct personalities and quirks. I am happy that Rachel McAdams is this movie (Canadian pride!). Compared to her roles in Mean Girls and Red Eye, she executed the alluring Irene Adler extremely well. I adore Holmes and Adler together.

There were times where I found Holmes to be talking too quickly in the movie and I was unable to catch his words. This didn't happen too often but whenever it did, I wasn't happy. I loved pretty much everything up until the very end. Just the last five minutes before the credits, something happened that confused me. The movie made room for a sequel and I fear it may not compare up to the first. However, we'll see how it goes when it comes out. For now, I recommend Sherlock Holmes as a pick for the theatres!

Last updated: 2010-04-08 17:10:33 by user01

The game’s afoot? A movie review–Sherlock Holmes

I don’t usually go to see movies that are not “blockbusters” on their opening night. However, despite the spoiler-heavy trailers, Sherlock Holmes is my favorite fictional detective, and I thought I’d give this film a try. Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law’s Holmes and Watson made the film good with their believable characterizations, but the sketchy action sequences and overuse of slow motion shots was kind of repetitive and annoying. Slow motion action was used while Holmes planned his mode of attack: in the movie’s opening scene, Holmes is involved in a criminal chase. He then thinks through what he has to do to disable the man, we see the action in slow-mo onscreen, and then we see it again in–ahem–real time.

I’m sorry, but repetitive scenes was why I didn’t like Vantage Point. One time would have been enough to show us how Holmes worked things out step by step. Two or more was too many.

The plot also lacked the depth to drive this movie onward as a successful franchise. Lord Blackwood, prominent black magician, has risen from the dead to commit murders in ritual fashion. Problem is, far too much screen time is given to the dark side of the film, and one wonders if the original Sherlock Holmes character would have even taken this case–despite Doyle’s interest in spiritualists. It just seemed an unlikely fit.

Then there’s the ultra-fast mumbled Holmesian diagnoses: in the theater, sometimes it was hard to catch exactly what was being said. And the the token explosion scene where all parties involved have only artistic scratches to show for their brush with death.

While I enjoyed the movie, it’s a fun night out flick(best quote: “What a busy afterlife you’re having”), the modern camera techniques and lack of plot just made it easy to shelf as just one more attempt to revive the detective.

The best part of the movie–I agree with the EW review–was the Holmes/Watson duo themselves. I’m not a purist, so the romps that Downey’s character had with Rachel McAdam’s character did not make me cry foul. Sure , Sherlock was written as a stuffy person who never let romance enter his narrow life. But who says the interpretation rang false–I kind of liked the new Holmes.

But it’s still a movie that could have been so much better.

Jade’s Grade: for the this movie, I give it a grade of B, perhaps with a plus.

(Read Less...)

Last updated: 2010-04-05 01:46:24 by user06

Sherlock Holmes

Hold onto your Santa hats....Sherlock Holmes is back in time for Christmas.
Detective Sherlock Holmes and his stalwart partner Watson engage in a battle of wits and brawn with a nemesis whose plot is a threat to all of England.
Visually dynamic and has a terrific script that anyone would be proud of. I was pinching myself to remember I was actually watching a Guy Ritchie film, its much different from the once good director of 'Lock Stock'. What we have here is essentially a terrific piece action film with excellent characters, whom have been developed well. Jude Law and Robert Downey Jr are well suited to the roles and come across completely faultless. Rachel MacAdams character could do with a little more enlightenment but the character played by Mark Strong is him all over, full of charisma as he portrays an evil conceited villain.
Plot wise, its anything but complex but never made less enjoyable. The action scenes are done well and fueled with adrenaline pumping tension, like the scene where Robert Downey Jr. brawls with a giant in probably what I thought was one of the most memorable moments of the film. It certainly packs a punch and sets and costumes look very genuine and convincing. Its no doubt a family action film for the Christmas period and very much a forerunner for the next installment. Would anyone like to place bets on Guy's old buddy Jason Statham as Moriarty? it will certainly drum up a lot of interest in the next part, as its already got people talking over at IMDB.

http://robinollysays.blogspot.com

Booze Revooze: A Drinker's Skewed View of SHERLOCK HOLMES

Ramblings:  Sherlock Homely

Final Proof: 2½ Shots

You know how you drink in strip clubs? The action is good, the show is nice and the talent is there.  You get a few drinks in you, you get a couple lap daces, you get your money’s worth of entertainment but then you gotta take a leak and in walkin’ back to the bathroom you see it out of the corner of your eyes, you feel it. Once you get away from the show you there’s nothing but shadow and smoke: shadows under the curled edges of the tattered carpets and the stale smoke of other strangers’ cigarettes. ‘Cause at these kind of clubs, they do all right with the show but they ignore the little things that make it real. That’s what Sherlock Holmes is like.

Any movie with Robert Downey Jr can never be a total waste. He was born, bred and is now the Mayor of Cool Town. Unfortunately Guy Ritchie hamstrung him by getting sloppy in the little scenes, those little segments that move the story along. We also get a Rachel McAdams who’s a little flat, and i’m not talking about her bodice size. Jude Law comes away from this whole thing looking pretty good, though, which made me feel all that worse for Bobby. It’s like Guy told Downey Jr to leave his trademark dry wit in the 20th century when coming to make this movie. Oh yeah, ’cause i didn’t tell you but this movie is set around 1870 and you know how much period pieces make me burp barf up my nose a little.

Strangely enough, though, the look was the best thing about the film.  Shots of the Tower of London under construction, St Paul’s titty looming grey in front of a blue metal sky, the wet cobblestone and costumes gave the film a cool sheen. And the action scenes were well-handled, as were those times when Holmes recites an entire person’s life after just seeing them for 5 minutes. Nah, my problem wasn’t with the big stuff.

Another minor thing i’m gonna rant about, though, is the ending. It’s one of those endings that look like a puzzle piece, and not a smooth edge piece, either. The ending was like a piece with a round jobby sticking way out and you can tell just by looking at it exactly what the next piece will look like. And then you relaize the puzzle isn’t really worth finishing because the picture isn’t all that good anyway. The only thing missing from the ending here was a huge lit up orange highway sign that flashed, CAUTION: SEQUEL over and over again.

Like i keep saying, Ritchie overlooked what Holmes never would have:  the little things.

Buzz Kills (Watch Out for Spoilers)

Sex: 1 Shot

So i wasn’t too impressed with Rachel  McAdams (31) performance as Irene Adler. Ritchie didn’t help things any  by only giving her one small shot at a flash while she was changing,  but then ruined it with Framing Titty Blocking, by severing her chest with the bottom of the screen. [Al K Hallism: "Titty Blocking" is when an actress is topless but the director hides her boobs through different miss-directing techniques.]

Still, i invented a drinking game with Rachel McAdams’ moles.

The Rachel McAdams Drinking Game
Rules:

1. Whenever you see Mole #1, drink a sip of beer
2. Whenever you see both Moles #1 & #2, take a gulp of beer
3. Whenever you see Mole #3, drink a shot of your favorite hard aclohol
4. Whenever you see Moles #1, #2 and #3 together, drink a shot and a beer chaser

For those who want to see the above picture without all the #s…
Here are the rest of the shots:
Playing the role of Mary Morstan, Watson’s fiancée, is Kelly Reilly  (32).

There was a Silken Butterfly flitting oh so sweetly yet briefly across the screen at the beginning. This is Amanda Grace  Johnson (22), who is the Young Woman Sacrifice.

For those of you who prefer Towers to Domes here’s Robert Downey Jr  (who’s fit as hell for 44).

And this is Jude Law, who still knows how to party at 37.

Drink: 1 Shot

While alcohol didn’t play a big part in the plot, there were quite a few alcohol scenes:

• Holmes gets wine thrown at him after he debriefs Mary during a restaurant dinner with her and Watson
• Holmes hits from a spectator’s flask during the boxing match (where we see how truly fit the shirtless (and now sober) Downey Jr really is)
• After he wins the match he grabs a wine bottle from a rack and pulls out the cork with his teeth
• Holmes drinks laced Margaux 1858 with Irene
• Holmes and the captain are drunk on wine while steaming down the Thames
• Holmes takes a drink of something hallucinogenic while performing a satanic ritual
• Lord Coward (Hans Matheson) drinks whiskey neat

  Rock & Roll:  1 Shot

Yeah, not surprisingly, Holmes didn’t rock out. There was a boner during the end credits, though, where  Ritchie chose to place “The Rocky Road To Dublin” by the Dubliners.  Yeah, English – Irish, it’s all the same thing, right?

Tell you what, though, i will give the movie and rock and roll shot for the well-shot action sequences.

Boring Technical Crap

Written by:

Michael Robert Johnson, Anthony Peckham, Simon Kinberg (screenplay)

Lionel Wigram, Michael Robert Johnson (screen story)

Directed by: Guy Ritchie

Starring

Robert Downey Jr – Sherlock Holmes

Rachel McAdams – Irene Adler

Kelly Reilly – Mary Morstan

Amanda Grace Johnson – Young Woman Sacrifice

Jude Law – Dr John Watson

Bottom Line

See it, but only because Susan Downey (Robert’s wife that he went on the wagon for) was one of the producers and she was good for Robert.  Anything that’s good for someone who was good for Robert is gonna be good for you, too.

(Read Less...)

Al K Hall<br />
Functional Alcoholic Slurperson<br />
(No, REALLY. Google &amp;quot;Slurperson&amp;quot; if you don't believe me.)

Last updated: 2010-03-31 16:39:11 by user08

The game's afoot?

I don’t usually go to see movies that are not “blockbusters” on their  opening night. However, despite the spoiler-heavy trailers, Sherlock  Holmes is my favorite fictional detective, and I thought I’d give this  film a try. Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law’s Holmes and Watson made the film good  with their believable characterizations, but the sketchy action  sequences and overuse of slow motion shots was kind of repetitive and  annoying. Slow motion action was used while Holmes planned his mode of  attack: in the movie’s opening scene, Holmes is involved in a criminal  chase. He then thinks through what he has to do to disable the man, we  see the action in slow-mo onscreen, and then we see it again  in–ahem–real time.

I’m sorry, but repetitive scenes was why I didn’t like Vantage  Point. One time would have been enough to show us how Holmes worked  things out step by step. Two or more was too many.

The plot also lacked the depth to drive this movie onward as a  successful franchise. Lord Blackwood, prominent black magician, has  risen from the dead to commit murders in ritual fashion. Problem is, far  too much screen time is given to the dark side of the film, and one  wonders if the original Sherlock Holmes character would have even taken  this case–despite Doyle’s interest in spiritualists. It just seemed an  unlikely fit.

Then there’s the ultra-fast mumbled Holmesian diagnoses: in the  theater, sometimes it was hard to catch exactly what was being said. And  the the token explosion scene where all parties involved have only  artistic scratches to show for their brush with death.
While I enjoyed the movie, it’s a fun night out flick(best quote:  “What a busy afterlife you’re having”), the modern camera techniques and  lack of plot just made it easy to shelf as just one more attempt to  revive the detective.

The best part of the movie–I agree with the EW review–was  the Holmes/Watson duo themselves. I’m not a purist, so the romps that  Downey’s character had with Rachel McAdam’s character did not make me  cry foul. Sure , Sherlock was written as a stuffy person who never let  romance enter his narrow life. But who says the interpretation rang  false–I kind of liked the new Holmes.
But it’s still a movie that could have been so much better.

Last updated: 2010-03-29 09:20:42 by kayhalo

Sherlock Holmes

The game's afoot as Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson brawl and banter their way through the devious trail of clues to the secret Order of the Pyramid and their lust for world domination through female sacrifice and - oh, is that Thames mud on your right knee, old chap? You must have been in the sewers under Parliament recently...which means that cut on your thumb wasn't from peeling an onion, now was it? Which means that faint odor of dog excrement I smell on your smoking jacket could only have come from...wait for it...from the - Oh, go and see the movie and find out for yourself where the Order of the Pyramid holds their secret ceremonies!

One Word Movie Review: GOOD

Sherlock Holmes is amusing, grimy and refreshingly unstuffy as the intellectual Holmes and practical Watson unravel Lord Blackwood's murderous plot to remake the world more to his liking. The plot borrows from real-life London and the famous 1982 Blackfriars Bridge hanging of "God's Banker", Roberto Calvi. As we learn early on, Sherlock Holmes is bored with the obvious petty crime of everyday life and thus, holed up in Baker Street, he awaits those rare cases which challenge his superior intellect. While he waits, he plays his violin for flies in a jar in hopes of controlling their movements with minor notes and thus, bring order to the chaos around him.

The true chaos is the imminent departure of Dr. Watson from Baker Street and into the arms of his wife-to-be, the sinister-looking Mary. As Victorian London is revealed in all its charcoal glory, we observe Holmes and Watson at their best when solving crimes and their worst doing anything else. The movie takes great care in delivering odd characters (dwarfs, giants, Lords and ladies) exaggerated evils (supernatural demons, chemical time bombs and secret conspiracies) and absurd situations (naked Holmes, pugilist Holmes and fugitive Holmes).  Despite the ambitious plot and over-the-top action, the essential appeal of Sherlock Holmes remains: the application of intellect and observation to solve the impossible crime. The cops are still befuddled and the criminals act with supreme over-confidence, as our Sherlock and his stand-up Doctor Watson chase the trail of clues to a very satisfying end.

This is a modern Sherlock Holmes, combining hyped-up action and modern sensibilities to classic characters and settings. With the sequel already set-up in the final scenes, we shall be seeing more of Holmes and Watson and another brawl and banter chase through the streets of old London.

The Story

Sherlock Holmes starts with cobbled streets, expanding to a wild carriage ride as the police hurry towards a grim crime scene where a woman is about to be sacrificed on an altar while a ominous black-robed priest supervises the ceremony. The police arrive too late, but not our heroes Holmes and Watson, who beat the dark altar boys senseless, save the girl and rip off the hood of the high priest. He is (gasp) the powerful Lord Blackwood! Now he will hang for his slaughter of five other innocent girls which Holmes could not prevent.

The story shifts forward a few months and we discover the Blackwood case was the last one pairing Holmes with his companion Dr. Watson, who is about to marry Mary and leave his Baker Street flat-mate for good. Of course, the Blackwood case extends beyond the Lord's execution when he rises from his grave. While Watson takes his sweet time buying a ring for his Mary, a former love of Holmes (who knew he had a love life?) in the person of Irene Adler enters his rooms and hires him to find a short, red-haired man. Holmes finds this dwarf in the most unusual location, links him to Blackwood and, (egads man!) the chase is on!

There are more clues than cobblestones in this movie, as just one character's whereabouts are deduced through the keep observance of the mud on his boots, the bandage on his thumb, the red clay on one knee of his pant leg and the distinct odor of dog excrement clinging to his clothing. Aha, so he must have been...but why spoil the fun of trying to guess why, who, how and when every crazy turn in this plot is deduced. Don't even try, unless you have knowledge of rare plants, explosive powders and the links between the ox, the lion, the eagle and mankind for world domination.

The high points of the movie involve several battles with a giant Frenchman (mon Dieu, quel'homme formidable) and a slow-motion gauntlet through an exploding dock. The final climax atop Tower Bridge (under construction) echoes back to the Blackfriars Bridge hanging and the secrets behind that symbolic death.

We end with Watson moving out and a new evil moving in as Irene reveals her relationship with the Professor, an academic genius by the familiar name of Moriarty.  Again Watson, the game's afoot! Oh damn, is that the end of the movie? Just when it was getting good...

The Genre

The classic novel adaptation genre is reliable, familiar and bankable. Sherlock Holmes is one of the greatest sources for adaptations for Hollywood, from the great Basil Rathbone in the 1940's to Christopher Plummer tracking Jack the Ripper to TV's Jeremy Brett's classic thoughtful portrayal. In all, hundreds of actors have played the character in movies, on TV or on stage.  Now Robert Downey Jr. adds his considerable acting talents to the role and brings an intelligence and vitality to Sherlock which is part Tony Stark, part Charlie Chaplin and a splash of Kirk Lazarus (serious actor from Tropic Thunder).

With a familiar character and a mystery plot structure based on deductive reasoning, the genre demands respect and certain rules which shouldn't be broken. This latest Sherlock Holmes keeps safely to the formula which made this character so popular.  The addition of slow-motion fisticuffs and eccentric experimentation on insects and animals in the Baker Street flat do not detract from the core story and add opportunities for Downey to display a new physicality and disturbing dark side to the character.

All in, this update of a classic genre gets high marks for atmospheric scenes of Victorian London, insight into the lives of the main characters and a welcome ramp-up of action to the intellectual chase down the obscure trail of clues.

The Overall Quality

The success of Sherlock Holmes rests with the actors and in this film, we have great performances by the three main characters:  Holmes, Watson and Blackwood. Guy Richie is a favorite director of mine since his first films and (with the exception of Swept Away) consistently delivering clever, interesting films which highlight ensemble actors in exaggerated roles, sparkled throughout by an edgy, violent tone. This latest PG effort takes the best of Richie's character structure (basically tossing a group of toughs together to snarl at each other until a trigger sets off the action) and layering in a gritty old London and a structured mystery plot to elevate him to a broader audience (perhaps a welcome thing now that he's not income-splitting with Madonna any more).

The world of Holmes is presented in grays and browns, using fog and dirt to obscure the longer view of the city just like our view of where the plot is going. The action scenes are unusual in their crunching violence and slow-motion deformation of body parts (people were looking away at some of the fights - in a PG movie, this is borderline), but there isn't any blood and even the hangings are discretely shown from the back, without any close-ups of death faces.

The story is all about secret fraternities, conspiracies, black magic and superstition which plays well with the time of Holmes, when scientific methods were still foreign in many parts of daily life.  The audience around me enjoyed the relationship between Jude Law and Robert Downey Jr. and this pairing of skilled actors sells the tone for the rest of the movie. You buy them together from the start and go along with them along the crazy path of clues to Blackwood's final end game.

Movie/Market Analysis

MarketBOB’s sentiment indicators, the GQS (Genre, Quality, Story) rate Sherlock Holmes an emotional BULL. There is a comfort and a satisfaction in returning to familiar characters done this well. This is worth the money and more, with strong appeal for a sequel and perhaps the beginning of a franchise. It depends, of course, on how long Robert Downey Jr. wants to blockbuster his way through theaters as Tony Stark and Sherlock Holmes.

Craig Forgrave (MarketBOB)

(Read Less...)

Last updated: 2010-03-26 20:08:08 by user08

Sherlock Holmes: Movie Review

 

Sherlock Holmes is one of the most recognized fiction characters we have out there and so, it would actually be a big surprise if you haven’t heard of him yet. Centuries after his character was first published by Arthur Conan Doyle, people still remember his wit and skill as a detective. Fast forward to present, "Sherlock Holmes" tries to make a refreshing retake of the legendary persona. Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law and director Guy Ritchie are up with a very big and daunting task. We have no doubts about their talent but can they deliver with this movie? Read on to find out our verdict.

The year is 1891 and Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and his partner Dr. Watson (Jude Law) has just stopped Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong) in completing his human sacrifice of a sixth girl - he succeeded in killing five girls previously. Lord Blackwood is found guilty by the court on charges of using the black arts and is sentenced to be hanged. On the day of his execution, Blackwood requests for Holmes and he warns him about other deaths that will eventually change the world. Blackwood is executed and pronounced by Watson himself as dead. Days later, Blackwood was seen walking away from his grave. Upon investigation, the burial chamber has been cracked open and the corpse inside the coffin is not Blackwood. Did Blackwood really defy death by to finish his plan? Can Holmes and Watson determine what Blackwood meant about changing their world?

So what can we say about "Sherlock Holmes"? One word sums it all up - astonishing. We just did our Top Ten Movies of 2009 list and what a way to start things off by having a movie that could be a contender on this year's edition of the top ten. Yes, you heard us right, this early on in the game, we believe "Sherlock Holmes" deserves a spot in the top ten. So what's so juicy about this film? Well first and foremost the cinematography was outstanding. It was so unique that only a Guy Ritchie could have thought of presenting it that way. We really liked the slow-mo scenes in which Holmes elaborates his game plan. Second, the acting was first class all the way. Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law and Mark Strong formed the trifecta in this area and all gave great performances that we just couldn't see who was the best of the bunch. Much could be said for Rachel McAdams though. Third, although hard to understand on some instances, the script and lines were a perfect mix of wit, seriousness and humor. We found ourselves laughing with Holmes' or Watson's quips against each other. Finally, the story is well-worth the ticket price. The story will thrill you from start to finish and the way the film was interwoven at the end was just perfect. "Sherlock Holmes" is definitely a film everyone should watch especially those who want an intellectual film that has balls.

Rating: 5 reels

Why you should watch it:
- brilliant cinematography that still stuns as in awe
- a storyline that is thrilling from start to finish
- acting was great and the right mix of wit was just perfect

Why you shouldn't watch it:
- some may find some story elements cliche`
- we had some hard time following the dialogue

Recommendations:

Last updated: 2010-03-11 19:56:38 by user06

Sherlock Holmes

I give the movie: 4.0/5

(Read Less...)

Wilson Ng - http://wilsoniscurious.blogspot.com/

Last updated: 2010-03-14 04:52:54 by wilsoniscurious

Sherlock Holmes

Sherlock Holmes
Starring:

Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Rachel McAdams, Mark Strong

Director: Guy Ritchie

Genre: Action, Adventure, Crime, Mystery

Rated: PG-13

Holmes and Watson work together to solve the mystery of Lord Blackwood who through the use of Black Magic has risen from the dead in his plan to take over London.

Sherlock Holmes is the reinterpretation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyles classic Sleuth as seen through the eyes of Guy Ritchie (Snatch, RocknRolla). This isn’t your fathers Sherlock Holmes, There is plenty of action and style to go with the mystery as well.

Holmes (Robert Downey Jr) is on the case to find out how Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong) who he previously captured, was able to rise from the grave after Watson (Jude Law) pronounced him dead at his hanging. The story revolves around Holmes lost love Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) wanting to employ Holmes to find a “Ginger Midget” who was working for Blackwood from there the case leads to French Giants, Secret Societies, Black Magic and the Quintessential Holmes nemesis Professor Moriarty.

The initial feel of Holmes sucks you in completely with Holmes explaining in slow-motion how he is going to incapacitate a man and then follows it up in real time exactly as explained. The fight scenes employ multiple fighting styles and include some of the best displays of Mixed Martial Arts captured on screen in a main stream film.

The only odd part of the film is the relationship between Holmes and Watson which borders on Homoerotic; It is a pairing that those not familiar with the original material might find a bit queer, With the major relationship arc being Watson moving out of a shared building and becoming engaged, Thus ending the Holmes/Watson partnership Given the feminine dandyism of Jude Law it’s not too farfetched to think that this relationship is more than just professional.

This is a Guy Ritchie film through and through with his typical visual panache and humor shining through from start to finish. The mystery is completely believable and eventually everything is explained. With an ending that leaves it open for the inevitable sequel. A fun film smartly paced with great humor and style, nice to see Ritchie keep the momentum gained from RocknRolla after the debacles of his Madonna years movies (Swept Away, Revolver). Grade-87

sherlock holmes

yeah, it’s just okay.  the best part is the interaction between holmes and watson.  the story is a little convoluted and by the end it’s pretty easy to tell they are trying to set up a series of films.  but it was good enough that i’ll go see them.  this film didn’t suck, it’s just nothing that i’d write home to mom about, ya know.

robert downey, jr. and jude law are terrific.  which as i said above is the best thing about the film.  and it’s important to have likable characters.  especially if you are setting up a series of films.

rachel mcadams is super hot and mark strong makes for a pretty creepy villian.  the supporting cast is all well and good.  guy ritchie brings some cool stuff into the mix as well.  sherlock being the genius that he is has the uncanny ability to see a situation, make his plan of action, then execute it.  for example, he sees a bad guy that he must get past so we see in slow motion his plan.  to punch him here, there and wherever all in slow motion.  then he executes his plan in a quick fury.  that’s pretty cool to see a couple of times in the film.

the scenery is all bleak, industrial age london.  it’s done very well.  i’m glad i live in a time where indoor plumbing and daily baths are fairly commonplace.  and i like to think big giant rats aren’t running wild in our meat processing plants.

i give this one three bad english teeth out of five.  i’m still way behind on my movies but if you havn’t seen avatar yet, go see that one first.  it’s bad ass.

(Read Less...)

Cal Reed

Sherlock Holmes (2009)

Directed By: Guy Ritchie

Starring: Robert Downey Jr, Jude Law, Rachel McAdams

What it’s all about:

Sherlock Holmes and his sidekick Dr. Watson stop a human sacrifice ritual being conducted by one Lord Blackwood just in time. Blackwood is incarcerated and hung for his crimes. Three days after he is pronounced dead his tomb is found open, and a witness claims he saw Lord Blackwood arise from the tomb. Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson must delve into the world of the occult to stop Lord Blackwood.

The Verdict:

Guy Ritchie’s re-imagining of the classic detective is sensational and over the top, yet matched with amazing set pieces, great performances from a solid cast and some genuinely funny moments, Sherlock Holmes will have enough to keep casual movie goers happy, yet enough substance to make the film enjoyable to existing fans. The chemistry between Jude Law and Robert Downey Jnr. is paramount to the films success, and while the story can seem to get a little lost along the way, all in all it’s an enjoyable holiday blockbuster.

7.5/10

Recommendations:

Last updated: 2010-03-04 20:18:08 by hellerphant

Sherlock Holmes

Basic Premise
Holmes and Watson are called upon to solve a case involving black magic and the walking dead. It's just the puzzle Holmes is looking for to fill his listless days, assuming he survives the experience.


Review
I admit to not remembering much about the Sherlock Holmes books I read back in high school (I do remember that I enjoyed them) so I can't make a comparison that way, but this was a fun movie. Robert Downey Jr. did a good job.

There was laughter and pain and darkness and deductions galore. Listening to Sherlock explain everything as the story progressed was a treat. And while some may think Sherlock wouldn't have been as physically inclined as the previews implied, I think it does fit his character considering how much trouble the man is bound to get himself in to.

Speaking of previews, there were actually scenes in the previews which don't appear in the movie. I kid you not. I haven't seen that in a while. I kept waiting for certain things to happen (won't say what) and they didn't. I didn't miss them but it was interesting that they weren't there. Guess I'll have to wait for the outtakes on the DVD.

Parental warning - The violence portrayed is "real". In other words, it could conceivably happen in the real world if someone had the ability or skill. No make-believe violence here. I don't remember much in they way of cursing (at least not the language kind :P) but there were tons of sexual innuendos.

Fun movie that was a nice way to pass the end of Christmas. And have no doubts that there will be a sequel. The writers spent the whole movie eluding to an underlying plot that may or may not be hashed out in the next movie. They may decide to do a different plot while dropping tidbits again, who knows.

I look forward to more Sherlock Holmes chronicles.

(Read Less...)

Recommendations: Star Trek (2009), Avatar, 300

D. Renee Bagby<br />
Building New Realms of Passion<br />
http://dreneebagby.com

Sherlock Holmes

I have a theory, and it goes like this: Robert Downey Jr. + movie = instant entertainment. The man is a gold mine. Downey Jr. has become the white Will Smith. One can only hope that they will star together in a summer blockbuster down the line (take notes, Hollywood).

When I heard there was a movie in the works about Sherlock Holmes, I was pumped. I could barely hold in my excitement. Then I heard that Robert Downey Jr. was playing Sherlock Holmes (I still wet my bed thinking about it) and then the trailer came out and boy did I put that thing on repeat like it was Beyonce's "Single Ladies." And then I heard it was being directed by Guy Ritchie. Whoa! Red flag! The last movie I saw made by Guy Ritchie was "Rocknrolla." Check it out, great movie (if you like cracked-out snorefests bubbling in awful ideas and a plot that would make "Lost" producers go "huh?") But, being the savvy movie-goer I am, I decided to check it out anyways. And honestly, I wasn't disappointed.

If anyone out there has read any Sherlock Holmes stories, (don't worry if you haven't, that doesn't make you an uneducated nincompoop or anything. Seriously, it doesnt), the movie will feel like you have just stepped back into the book, like you never put it down. This isn't an origins story - Holmes and Watson are already friends, solved lots of mysteries that would make Scooby-Doo jealous and have a sweet little bromance thing going. They just solved a big mystery, concerning a certain Lord Blackwood who has killed a bunch of girls using black magic. They catch him in the act and send him to the noose. A few days later though, Blackwood rises from the dead and Holmes is called in to solve the case (again.)

If you haven't already guessed, I love Robert Downey Jr. He is the main selling point of this movie. The man steps into Holmes's shoes like Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote him in. Downey creates a character much like Johnny Depp created for "Pirates of the Carribbean." Instantly memorable and a delight to watch while he interacts with the world around him.

Prepare for a lot of deducing, Holmes style. Prepare for witty dialogue and some of the best special effects this year. Slow-motion explosions somehow never get old. Prepare for clues that in retrospect seem obvious, but only if you were actually Sherlock Holmes could you spot them before they've been solved for you.

The storyline is a little convoluted at times and the movie doesn't have an incredible amount of re-watch value, but it's good to see Robert Downey Jr. doing what he does best: convincing me that he is someone else. Oh and Jude Law as Watson and Rachel McAdams as femme fatale Irene Adler ain't so bad either.

3 out of 4 stars

Last updated: 2010-03-02 09:20:37 by JoeandChrisO

Sherlock Holmes: Elementary, it's not

Full disclosure: The Movie Slut adores Sherlock Holmes AND she loves Robert Downey Jr. even more. So it's no surprise that she smiled her way through Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes. The question is, will you?

The answer is yes, if you like action films, foggy Victorian London, damsels in distress, bare-chested hunks, side-kick flicks and villians named Prof. Moriarty. 

This is not your grandfather's Holmes, still, it's true to the spirit of the quirky, eccentric genius detective and the good doctor who's always by his side. In fact, the Movie Slut thinks Jude Law's Dr. Watson is more true to the original than some of the foolish fuddy-duddies in the old films. After all, in the Conan Doyle stories, he was not only a physician, but also a war veteran and the chronicler of Sherlock's adventures. No slouch.

Can't wait for the sequel.

(Read Less...)

See you at the movies, The Movie Slut

Sherlock Holmes

Three different screenwriters took separate passes on "Sherlock Holmes," each of whom made enough of a contribution to get an individual writing credit. One of these writers, and one of the movie's producers, also got separate story credit.

And then there's Guy Ritchie, the stylish director of all those British crime flicks, who certainly brought his own artistic sensibility to the process.

All in all, there were a lot of cooks in the "Sherlock Holmes" kitchen, and the end result reflects that.

The movie is pulled in several different directions as it tries to encompass Doctor Watson's imminent marriage, the reappearance of Holmes' old girlfriend, and the machinations of a seemingly supernatural threat to London.

The movie opens with an engaging action sequence in which our boy Holmes stops the dastardly Lord Blackwood -- who hardly had a chance in life with that name -- from performing another ritualistic human sacrifice.

Lord Blackwood is sentenced to the gallows and duly hanged. But, like the Nazarean on whose birthday "Sherlock Holmes" opened, Blackwood's death proves temporary.

The mystery of Lord Blackwood's apparent return from the grave, while initially intriguing, grows overly complicated fast, and Holmes' investigation descends into a drily procedural march from point a to point b to point c.

There's a reason the mystery genre has vanished from the big screen. Its stories are too intellectual. Feature audiences crave raw, throbbing emotion, and while there's some of that in "Holmes," especially in the opening hour, it's not enough. The fear and the fun and even the humor all fade away after awhile.

Part of the problem is the boring villain, Lord Blackwood. He's a cardboard cutout lacking any personal grudge against Holmes -- or vice versa -- so we're left waiting for Professor Moriarty in the sequel.

Also, Blackwood's plan for world domination is unusually stupid. It would never have worked even without Holmes' intervention. (Spoiler: it involves fooling the world into thinking he is a devilish sorcerer through the power of illusion, and then ruling everyone through fear. Yep. That'll work.)

This is not to say "Sherlock Holmes" is a complete failure. There's more to a movie, after all, than the script. (I intend to erase that sentence in a few days so it does not enter the archives.)

Robert Downey Jr. is such a superb match for Holmes -- a fun, physical, modernized Holmes -- that he carries the movie for a good forty-five minutes before the weight of the story puts a damper on things.


Jude Law is also good as Doctor Watson, and the fact that the heart of the story revolves around the Holmes-Watson relationship is just as it should be. Rachel McAdams is fine as the attractive Irene Adler, but the real romance is the platonic one between Holmes and Watson.

The characters are in place and the tone has been figured out. All Sherlock needs now is a really good story and the game will be... aw shucks, what's the word...?

SCORE

How Accomplished: 46/100

How Much I Enjoyed: 48/100

Sherlock Holmes

I attempted to watch Sherlock Holmes 3 times. One time all my friends who I was suppose to see it with ffk'd (bloody bastards haha) The second time, I went to GSC, so excited I am finally gonna watch it and then my friend goes, " Surprise! We're gonna see Paranormal Activity instead!" (bitch) So the third time I finally got to see it, and hell was this movie worth the wait.



Sherlock Holmes is the character based on Arthur Conan Doyle's novels. This film however portrays the character as an eccentric. This guy is really weird.. brilliant, but weird. The movie deals with a sorcerer, Lord Blackwood whom Holmes has put behind bars. Blackwood is executed but is mysteriously resurrected from the dead to begin wreaking havoc in London. In comes Sherlock Holmes and his trusted sidekick Dr. Watson, once again to solve the mystery. and catch Blackwood before it's too late.



Robert Downey Jr. totally deserves his Golden Globe win for playing Sherlock Holmes. This guy can practically play any character possible. He's done Charlie Chaplin, he's done Tony Stark, Paul Avery, Joe Wershba and now the mastermind himself.. Sherlock Holmes.


He is fantastic as the detective. He pulls out each line with incredible humor which brings new light to the usually dark character.



I made this comparison after I left the cinema, something I kept noticing while watching the film. And no one agrees with me, hopefully you guys do.. I thought Sherlock Holmes was a lot like Captain Jack Sparrow. Okay let me explain. The way Sherlock acts is so reminiscent of Cpt. Sparrow. The outlandish behavior, the 'makes things up as he goes along' persona. Even their musical themes are sort of the same. You know.. the 'this is a very dangerous situation and you are not taking this seriously!' tone.






Right right right? Or probably it's because they are both done by Hans Zimmer. But anyway.. bottom line is Sherlock Holmes is the new Jack Sparrow. So grotesquely in your face yet you can't get enough of him. He's that crazy character everyone loves to watch just cause he is such a juxtaposition.



Jude Law and Robert Downey Jr. are so great together. You can't hold a straight face watching them give each other shit throughout the whole movie. The film is incredibly hilarious but still maintains the same wit of a British film. I hope they make a Brit sitcom series about Holmes and Watson as roommates. That would be like my fantasy wish, yes.. don't judge me!



Rachel McAddams is HOT. Nothing else to add sir.



I loved the first 2 parts of the film where it was the classic detective story of Sherlock trying to solve the case.. with retarded humor might I add. It's the 3rd act that really lost me. The detective story suddenly turned into a Jerry Bruckheimer movie. Wow suddenly there's a doomsday machine that they have to disarm, slow motion fights on a suspension bridge, a lot of explosions... I still like Sherlock Holmes, don't get me wrong.. it just turned into a completely different film from the first half hour of the movie. I was going like "Whaaa?"



I am definitely looking forward to the Holmes sequel. I hope they stay within the premise of the first film of being first and foremost a detective comedy, and not sell out to become an action film like what happened with the POTC sequels. Loved the film, t just lost me completely at the end, but it's still a very good, smart popcorn flick.

RATING: 6/10

(Read Less...)

NicholasC

Sherlock Holmes

Guy Ritchie’s true subject has always been London; the moneyed, brutish boxer’s fist that knuckles the Thames. London, that city of thieves, scoundrels and massively over-priced hotels, where the air turns your snot black and the weather drives a shiv into your bones. Like New York, but without the iconic silhouette, London is known more for its streets than its skyscrapers: Downing Street, Fleet Street; Carnaby Street. Even London’s most famous detective has a famous address: 221b Baker Street, home of Sherlock Holmes. In Guy Ritchie’s new movie, the cerebral sleuth returns to a city rank with wrongdoing. London’s tourists will know it well.

We begin with at the end of a hunt. Always lost without a criminal mastermind to pit his wits against, Holmes is after Lord Blackwood, a satanic peer of the realm. When apprehended in the middle of a ritual sacrifice, Blackwood vows revenge on Holmes. He claims he will return from beyond the grave, after hanging, and soon enough, after hanging, Blackwood rebounds. Fortunately, black magic doesn’t frighten Holmes. He’s more concerned with Doctor Watson’s impending nuptials. But – implored by Scotland Yard and seduced by an old flame – Holmes resolves to show Blackwood for a liar, to save England, and to stop Watson from settling down.

Is all this therapy for Guy Ritchie? After seven years of red string, Jewish mysticism and an aging pop music superpower, any man would be forgiven for sticking to what he knows. While Madonna/Lord Blackwood parallels would be going too far, the celebration of male camaraderie in Sherlock Holmes is surely something to do with Guy being a bachelor again. Divorce from Madonna seems to have restored Ritchie’s ad-man-meets-Alfie persona, and he doesn’t waste time seeking meaning in a Gothic detective tale. Sherlock Holmes isn’t – for good or ill – Jude the Obscure (his most famous adventure has him on the trail of a monster dog), so there’s no need for false maturity. It’s two boys vs. a baddie. The subtext is: Guy’s single.

Also out of jail (though in his case, L.A. County jail, not a marriage euphemism) is Sherlock Holmes himself, Robert Downey Jr. Now nine years drug-and-alcohol-free, it’s hard to believe he’s the same the actor who once, to use a Holmes metaphor, threw his career off the Reichenbach Falls. Downey plays Holmes with a wisp of camp but a core of polished silver. You get the feeling Holmes would happily marry Doctor Watson, but also that he could, dexterously, break your jaw. Although this is Downey having fun, and playing Holmes like Iron Manwith a watch fob, it still takes skill to convince an audience that a Victorian gentleman is adept at kung-fu.

For Jude Law, aged, disgraced, and rueing the day he met Sienna Miller, Doctor Watson seems like a lifeline. Freed from the responsibility of being the star, Law becomes likeable. He no longer looks like the smarmy golden-haired bastard who everyone willed to fail, but instead like a winning character actor, a great foil for his co-star and the sort of man who wouldn’t shag his children’s nanny. Though the role of Watson (by necessity) means you must be subordinate to Holmes, Law finds a way of making Watson invaluable, partly by suggesting that he’s the love of Holmes life, and partly by keeping Robert Downey Jr. on his toes. Law’s affectionate smile – after punching Holmes in the face – is the most disarming of his career.

Guy Ritchie is about the right age to remember Young Sherlock Holmes, the Steven Spielberg-produced hormonal detective yarn. In 1985 it made a big impression on a lot of boys. Then, as now, lots of people claimed Sherlock Holmes had been done a disservice, that they’d got it all wrong, and Holmes would never do this or that. But London looked right – London’s streets could get you murdered – and Holmes did investigate crime in-between action scenes. What critics really disliked – the same thing Madonna disliked about Guy Ritchie, by the end – was the lack of seriousness. But that’s a good thing, both for Mr. Holmes, and the former Mr. Ciccone.

Sherlock Holmes

Robert Downey Jr. has a complete and masterful charm and ease about him on the screen. Sometimes I think that he is smarter than the material he gets to star in. He is such a good actor and screen presence that he can make you smile, feel comfortable and know you are watching someone who knows what he is doing. He almost saves "Sherlock Holmes" from becoming a total misfire and disappointing star vehicle and possible franchise. "Sherlock Holmes" has it's moments and they are mostly the dialogue and the way it is delivered by Downey and his co stars. Jude Law as Watson has a great chemistry with Downey Jr. and they work the dialogue well off of each other. Also the fetching and magnetic Rachel McAdams proves again she has star power just waiting to jump out and she has good chemistry with Downey Jr. The film though is not really that memorable or good. It is overlong, the story is weak and a not as smart detective probably could have solved the mystery. I am not saying I figured it out but the case is too easy for someone like Holmes to figure out.

The villain is capably played by a great new promising actor Mark Strong who was great in "Young Victoria". The problem is the villain doesn't make a lasting and menacing enough bad guy and is never really on screen. The real villain in the books by Arthur Conan Doyle is Professor Moriarty and he makes a brief appearance setting up a villain for a possible sequel. There will definitely now be a sequel thanks to the Box Office take and the best thing about that is it might promise a better sequel. The real heart of the books was the strength of Moriarty and he was a match for Holmes. Since there is a sequel and Moriarty will be in it maybe it will be a stronger and better written movie. There is promise here because of the chemistry between and acting of Downey, Law and McAdams. What you have with this movie is a weak villain, too many big, loud and clumsy action scenes and no time to just soak in the movie because it is really choppy and frantic. "Sherlock Holmes" should be a battle of wits not a "Transformers" movie. I do recommend you see it if you like Robert Downey Jr. because as always he lights up the screen in this near miss.

(Read Less...)

Vincent Snavely

Sherlock Holmes

     Holiday blockbusters are always so dicey.  They seem to want to include something for everyone (so everyone will pay to see them) but satisfy almost no one.  "Sherlock Holmes" does this and still manages to pull off something that's enjoyable, even if it's not on par with the classic source material.
 
     In this latest tale of these iconic characters, Jude Law plays Dr Watson, who is finally giving up mysteries and murders so he can get married.  Holmes, played rather realistically and convincingly by Robert Downey Jr, isn't ready to call it quits, and isn't above trying to ruin Watson's marriage to satisfy his own need for intellectual stimulation.  Holmes and Watson are soon pulled into a mystery that threatens the very foundations of British government and are compelled to solve it.  (So, what else is new?)
 
     Robert Downey Jr. does a great job as a troubled and driven Holmes.  The story is fairly intricate, as it should be, yet remains believable.  (Some parts more than others.)  It should be difficult to go wrong with good actors and legendary characters, you don't even need that great of a story, and this story isn't half bad, however, this movie tries to pack in way too much for the sake of drawing a large, holiday movie audience, and it suffers for it.  The pace is broken up by too many action points and unnecessary special effects sequences.  At two hours and eight minutes, you can afford to lose some of the slow motion explosions and fight scenes.  The poor pace also makes it difficult to connect to the characters, which is a real shame with these actors and characters. 
 
     "Sherlock Holmes" wastes a lot of potential in order to draw a large, holiday audience, but it does manage to make an enjoyable movie, even if it could have been much, much better.

Brian
Ciné Critique Américain

Sherlock Holmes

I admit to not remembering much about the Sherlock Holmes books I read back in high school (I do remember that I enjoyed them) so I can't make a comparison that way, but this was a fun movie. Robert Downey Jr. did a good job.

There was laughter and pain and darkness and deductions galore. Listening to Sherlock explain everything as the story progressed was a treat. And while some may think Sherlock wouldn't have been as physically inclined as the previews implied, I think it does fit his character considering how much trouble the man is bound to get himself in to.

Speaking of previews, there were actually scenes in the previews which don't appear in the movie. I kid you not. I haven't seen that in a while. I kept waiting for certain things to happen (won't say what) and they didn't. I didn't miss them but it was interesting that they weren't there. Guess I'll have to wait for the outtakes on the DVD.

Parental warning - The violence portrayed is "real". In other words, it could conceivably happen in the real world if someone had the ability or skill. No make-believe violence here. I don't remember much in they way of cursing (at least not the language kind :P) but there were tons of sexual innuendos.

Fun movie that was a nice way to pass the end of Christmas. And have no doubts that there will be a sequel. The writers spent the whole movie eluding to an underlying plot that may or may not be hashed out in the next movie. They may decide to do a different plot while dropping tidbits again, who knows.

I look forward to more Sherlock Holmes chronicles.



Review originally posted at The Multiverse's Archival Chambers on 26 Dec 2009.

(Read Less...)

Recommendations: Star Trek (2009), Avatar, 300

D. Renee Bagby<br />
Building New Realms of Passion<br />
http://dreneebagby.com

Last updated: 2010-02-13 10:26:20 by dreneebagby

SHERLOCK HOLMES (2009)

BOTTOM LINE: “Sherlock Holmes” is something of a surprise packet; entertaining, fast-paced and true to the spirit and substance of the original Sir Arthur Conan Doyle stories, but with modern twists and quirky updates to the characters that purists may hate but work surprisingly well.

THE GOOD: The previews for “Sherlock Holmes” emphasised the comedy and action to an extent that I wondered whether or not it could be taken seriously. Surprisingly, director Guy Ritchie has fashioned a tale that is very true to the original stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. The mysterious Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong) is hanged for the murder of five women, but somehow manages to rise from the dead, and in the process, sets about a plan where he will take over the world as the representative of an evil, supernatural power. The quirky, and extremely eccentric Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and his reluctant assistant Dr. Watson (Jude Law) unravel the mystery using their brilliant means of deduction and discover Blackwood is a total fraud, but a smart one who knew how to manipulate scientific methods to make himself look otherworldly. What works well is the fact that the story works just as well as the original tales, with Holmes finding the most logical explanation for the otherwise extraordinary situation. Director Guy Ritchie has made some cosmetic changes, upping the action quotient, and making great use of Robert Downey Jr to portray a Sherlock Holmes that is more eccentric and whacky rather than the composed English gentleman; this works well and is a surprise. The mystery is engaging, as is the gradual appearance of super villain Moriarty, who we never actually see, but will no doubt appear in the inevitable sequel. “Sherlock Holmes” is great entertainment, and manages to update a story that has been done many times before but in a fresh and energetic way.

THE BAD: This is purely up to individual taste, but it is worth pointing out that this Sherlock Holmes is not technically the one that many fans of the character may be ready for. What is presented on screen by Robert Downey Jr and Guy Ritchie is an erratic genius, bordering on autistic. Coupled with the fact that he is somehow a street fighter, many who are used to a more detective style gentleman may be disappointed. However, Robert Downey Jr’s spirited performance is so good that you would be hard pressed not to like it.

RATING: 8/10

Todd Murphy <br />
http://www.allaboutmovies.net

Sherlock Holmes (Movie Review)

Sherlock Holmes, directed by Guy Ritchie, and starring Robert Downey, Jr. as Holmes and Jude Law as Watson, is a huge disappointment. A truly re-imagined Sherlock Holmes is an interesting idea and I really wish this new movie was that. The previews lead one to believe that this is vintage Guy Ritchie…action, quips, bold, booming and quickly paced. This movie is emphatically not that. What it is is hugely boring. It is full of quips, but quips do not a movie make. The chemistry between the two leads is palpable, but chemistry does not a script make nor does it make for good acting. I love Robert Downey, Jr., but he is horrible. His accent is abysmal and he mumbles most of his lines, perhaps to hide the fact that he surprisingly cannot maintain an English accent.  Jude Law as Watson is fine, but…not that it matters…when did he lose his looks?  Save your money and rent Ritchie’s Snatch or Downey’s Tropical Thunder instead.

(Read Less...)

Last updated: 2010-01-22 07:12:55 by jfuchsman

Sherlock Holmes

It’s particularly painful to see a film about the world’s greatest detective being so stunningly badly-plotted. SHERLOCK HOLMES is a film that barely manages to save itself from shittiness, and I find it a bit revealing that this represents the filmmakers’ idea of a Holmes for “modern audiences”. A lot of this film is indeed loyal to Arthur Conan Doyle’s detective, with the important exception that Holmes was not an average action hero, plus he did not possess a sense of smell that could easily earn him the nickname Bloodhound Holmes.

In fact, the filmmakers try way too hard to establish the detective’s genius to the audience. And while the scenes showing the way he plans a sequence of punches and kicks to knock his opponents out are aesthetically pleasant and even amusing, it’s ridiculous he can predict so far ahead. Sherlock Holmes had extraordinary deductive ability – not clairvoyance. And as aforementioned, I can accept Holmes having a good nose — but not as good as the movie tries to depict it. With a nose like that, it’s a mystery why Holmes doesn’t just go on all fours and sniff his way to wherever the villain is hiding at the moment.

Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong) is the villain, as evidenced by his attempt to sacrifice a young woman in the beginning of the film, being stopped by Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and his loyal sidekick, Watson (Jude Law). Watson is about to get engaged to Mary (Kelly Reilly), something that will force him to live away from his long-time roommate Holmes, much to the latter’s dislike. However, after Blackwood is hanged and pronounced dead by Watson himself, he comes back from the dead, and Watson, fearing for his reputation and not resisting another adventure, reluctantly goes along with Holmes to find out how this happened. Also, Holmes has to deal with the involvement of con artist Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) with whom, of course, he has a lot of sexual tension.

That last bit is only one of this film’s many cliches, which go from an object being accidentally kicked off a high ledge to denote fatal height — something that is already quite fucking obvious without that particular visual aid, thank you — to a gigantic henchman who takes orders from the main villain. Not to mention the locations of a murder forming a symbol on a map, something that seems to serve no purpose other than cluing Holmes in to what Blackwood’s next step will be. Hell, there’s even a fucking crow that shows up whenever a death is imminent.

And these cliches are not part of a good plot, or even a decent plot. Not only the whole thing seems extremely convoluted when Holmes breaks it down in the flashback-filled ending (instead of going to help an ally who has just fallen off a high ledge and might be very hurt and in need of medical aid), there’s no getting around some of the film’s larger plotholes, like Watson, a renowned physician, failing to notice that Blackwood has no marks around his neck from being fuckinghanged. And even that pales beyond the moment Holmes deduces a radio transmitter — a technology the movie itself implies was not yet invented — must be in use to activate a certain machine from another room — in other words, Holmes quite simply deduces a technological breakthrough when faced with a mechanism that doesn’t have any visible activation switch on it.

It is, however, an entertaining film. Some of the dialogue is very inspired, like the excellent moment Inspector Lestrade (Eddie Marsan, efficient) tells Holmes, “In another life, you would have made an excellent criminal,” to which Holmes, in a moment truly worthy of the original Holmes, replies, “Yes, and you, sir, an excellent policeman.” And regardless of the plot’s stupidity, it is always a pleasure to witness the work of the talented Robert Downey Jr. It’s particularly interesting how his gaze never seems to stay on a single spot for long, always moving to examine something else. His chemistry with the always brilliant Jude Law works, and Rachel McAdams, as Irene Adler, expresses the character’s main traits very convincingly: her cleverness and irresistible charm. Mark Strong, sadly, is given a very average villain to work with, but much better than his character on SUNSHINE, at least.

As the director, Guy Ritchie does an inconsistent job. Some of the special effects are dodgy (like the unfinished ship accidentally sailing away) and he resorts to some pointlessly intricate camera movements, like an angle that starts upside-down and goes back upright by following two characters in pursuit. The actors’ movements in some scenes are equally artificial, especially during the sequence Holmes uses smoke from a fireplace to fool an enemy: the other character simply turns his back to Holmes, despite the detective being on his feet and free to walk around, restrained only by handcuffs.

But Ritchie offers some good moments, like when the camera moves away from Irene Adler, revealing where she’s at, only to return to her in a smooth and aesthetically great movement. And the explosion that Ritchie films in slow motion is worthy of applause, despite some problematic CGI (the fire is obviously digital, but it also looks very digital). And while the action scenes are quite excessive and use a lot of fast-cutting, the editing is competent enough to make sure they’re at least clear. The pretty cinematography aids Ritchie in his depiction of Victorian England, and Hans Zimmer’s score uses a relatively original, but very well-chosen style, resulting in a remarkable soundtrack.

But Ritchie cannot resist filming the climactic final battle beneath an ominous dark sky, and the aforementioned scene where Holmes breaks the whole plot down is painful not only due to the plot being laughable, but also due to the extremely artificial situation a certain character finds himself in while this is happening (it involves planks of wood that are apparently very weak but possess great sense of dramatic timing, with the best timing easily belonging to the heavy prop that simply decides to fall at a very convenient moment).

It is an entertaining movie, but if SHERLOCK HOLMES is what filmmakers believe to be appropriate to modern audiences — a irreverent action hero with superhuman senses and clairvoyance that barely differs from other irreverent action heroes — than I think we should go back to aiming for victorian audiences. They seemed to be able to hold their attention without an action scene having to break out every five minutes.

Originally written on January 19th 2010 

http://andrenavarro.wordpress.com/

Last updated: 2010-01-20 12:07:58 by andre_navarro

Sherlock Holmes Is Brilliant!!!

The favourite criminologist and a big influencer for the modern world of detective industry and science forensic expertise, a character made marvelous into legacy by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the movie has been made and presented. First word - impressive. The film made a great and dark companion for this Christmas season nevertheless. It is highly entertaining and you will never get disappointed at all.

The film adaptation goes loose and it does not featured exclusively from any of the short novels Doyle has ever written. In fact, it goes original, taking into the account of the characters and the descriptions we have ever known. Take yourself a jar full of Bohemian and Victorian styles. Wait, those were the type of Sherlock Holmes we have been waiting for right? Guy Ritchie's adaptation has already won my first appraisal here - been different yet faithful. Sherlock Holmes is no longer a robot who deducts and logical-rationalizing everything as previously thought. In fact, Guy Ritchie turns him into a master of eccentricity, messy and witty. At least, his brain is still working and the elements of criminologist remain intact.

The story is strong and in fact the conceptual approach took by Ritchie is to take Sherlock, the wizardry of science and logical to take on Lord Blackwood, the wizardry of black magic. We know how Holmes despise the elementary of wizardry, so the mechanics on how he will deduct them all is simply fascinating. Called it a clash of titans when you realize how magic and science can battled it all out to this. Only in Sherlock Holmes, it was made as such intriguing way.

The plot is a bit too fast. Sherlock was never a fast-talker but you get one here. Most of the time it seems incomprehensible but let me assure you that you will get everything explained in details and nothing left out. The explanations are there but it seems like Guy Ritchie is avoiding the film to swell into a longer running time. With 128 minutes on clock, I have the feeling that this movie may need another extra 20 minutes to cool down the tempo. But a relief is that nothing in the stones left unturned. 

Probably the humour is also the corner-stone for the movie. Essentially when you see Robert Downey Jr, you will have big chances of seeing humour, action, mesmerizing dialog and cheesy moments as well. For the laughter-affinity or if you need some laughter, this movie is completely suitable for you.

Cinematography by the world's renown Philippe Rousselot is so great. The setting of a dirty-to-the-air of London and exquisite heritage of Baker Street looks highly imaginative enough to suggest to correct era. There are plenty action and fist exchange, thus making this Sherlock Holmes film as the one that possess a different setting for a racing action flick. We know Holmes is a good fighter and it was done as closely as it is. But what adds into the flavor is because of the extra gunpowder you need to blow up the barrels and gas-vaporizing machine.

The casting of Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law as best buddy Sherlock Holmes and Dr John Watson is a good news. Holmes is a filthy guy but has an constructive deduction mind with his addiction to cocaine water and Watson is a classy out-runner person but with a dark secrets over gambling. Both characters are original and were brought well by the two class actors. Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law form a complex but interesting bond of chemistry between them. Not to be confused as gay, but both played well to the sort of they relied so much together to solve a case - another classics from Doyle.

Mark Strong whom played the villainous Lord Blackwood, a satanic with the wizard-craft on his hand, is remarkably strong. Rachel McAdams on the other way is not solid for her role as the femme fatale. Hers is not too disappointing but the role did less to show that she is really a femme fatale while losing some of her charms as a real "The Woman".

Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes is very different than any others before. The adventure is there. The mystery is there. The trail of investigation is there too. But I will not regard this as a masterpiece. But this outing by Guy Ritchie to attempt an indifferent approach on Sherlock Holmes does work well. I am definitely looking out for a sequel and needless to say, sherlock will embattle his greatest nemesis of all time. 

(Read Less...)

Recommendations: Inception

Have yourself a cup of green tea

Sherlock Holmes

Sherlock Holmes is the latest character to get a ‘reboot’ for today’s generation in an attempt to start a new Hollywood franchise.  And in this case…I think they got it right (as a film, the box office will decide if it becomes a franchise of course).  Robert Downey Jr. continues to make all of us who are fans of his immense talent look good for hoping he would conquer his demons (personally I’ve been a big fan of his since Chaplin).  As the title character, Downey plays into the best parts of his own persona (a possible genius internally who looks like a simpleton on the outside) to headline a fun, ‘could/should this have been a summer release?’ movie.  And in my opinion, the action may be a wee bit too slow for the summer, but it’s perfect counterprogamming right now (even though that didn’t stop Downey from getting a Golden Globe nod here).  Jude Law is pitch perfect as Watson, used here as the sensible more down to earth member of this Dynamic Duo, and Rachel McAdams still has one of the prettiest smiles in Hollywood and is perfectly charming as the love interest.

Even the story of the film feels right, a ’supernatural’ villain who comes back from the dead to terrorize London.  But that’s not possible right?  I don’t know how ‘rewatchable’ this film is,but it’s fun for the audience to play along with Holmes and try to figure out how certain things happen in the story.

So a fun film for the holiday season in the middle of the more serious stuff that’s popping up with awards season also in full bloom.  Nice if you just want some good old fashioned Hollywood ‘junk food’.

Last updated: 2010-01-18 14:32:16 by malikaziz

Movie Review: Sherlock Holmes (2009)

I admit I don’t know a whole lot about the Sherlock Holmes created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.  I may have read a few story books or seen a couple of TV shows about the super sleuth as a child, but on the whole my memory is pretty fuzzy.

Accordingly, when I watched the new film Sherlock Holmes directed by Guy Ritchie, I didn’t have a pre-conceived notion of how the character was supposed to behave.  I understand a lot of old school fans may be quite appalled at the way Sir Conan’s creation has been butchered in this ‘re-invention’ (in the same way I was devastated with what Hollywood did with Astro Boy), but I didn’t have such a problem.

With that in mind, I quite liked it!  That’s saying a lot because I haven’t liked a Guy Ritchie film since Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (and I didn’t even like that very much).

But thankfully, Ritchie did not directly apply his usual disorganised, quick-cutting style to Sherlock Holmes.  There’s still some of that rapid editing, but Ritchie kept it under control enough to prevent it from getting irritating and disorientating.  The end result is a slick, entertaining 2-hour feature with a lot of wit, a fair dash of humour, and plenty of action.

One of my favourite things about the film is how it embodied that old London feel – applying that grey, damp, dirty look to London’s streets and best known landmarks (many of which I had recently visited during my stay in the UK).  The sets and special effects were terrific, making that world appear realistic without diverting attention from the focus of the story.
I don’t want to reveal the plot, but I will say that it’s a pretty decent mystery with a supernatural slant to it.  There are also a few loose ends which will most likely be tied up in a sequel (and based on box-office stats it appears sequels will be forthcoming).

The performances were awesome.  Robert Downey Jr has demonstrated time after time that he is capable of playing just about any character with conviction.  To me, he is a wonderful Sherlock Holmes.  He may not be much like the one described in the original books, but he makes the character his own and runs with it.  Clever, resourceful, funny and action hero – Downey Jr is all of these things.

And of course, no Sherlock Holmes would be complete without Dr Watson, and Jude Law is a great complement to Downey Jr.  The chemistry between the two actors is undeniable.  From the witty banter to the more physical action scenes, Law is the perfect sidekick – crucial but not thunder-stealing.

On the other hand, as much as I love Rachel McAdams, she felt a little out of place here.  She’s not bad (and always pleasing on the eye), but she was a little too underused in my humble opinion.  Hopefully if there are sequels she will get a more prominent role and we’ll get to learn more of her history with Holmes.

Overall, a surprisingly solid, smarter-than-average popcorn movie.  There were a few slightly slower moments about half-an-hour into the film, but for the most part it managed to grab my attention.  If this is the first of a new franchise then I’ll certainly be looking forward to more Sherlock Holmes adventures in the future.

3.75 stars out of 5!

(Read Less...)

PJM

Last updated: 2010-01-04 08:10:57 by user04

Sherlock Holmes

Sherlock Holmes - now there's a name that has been around for ages. The famous series of detective novels and stories written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle more than a hundred years ago are still being read and what's more, are still being made into films.

The most recent of which is called Sherlock Holmes and was released a little more than a week ago on Christmas Day, 2009. This film, directed by Guy Ritchie and starring Robert Downey Jr. as Holmes and Jude Law as Dr. Watson. is doing quite well at the box office and has an excellent chance to be nominated for some Oscars.

The film takes place in London. This is not the light and airy London that we recently saw in Last Chance Harvey with Dustin Hoffman and Emma Thompson. Or the London we saw in Woody Allen's Match Point - those settings were sunny and beautiful and romantic. No, this is the London of the late Victorian 1890's - a London that is dark, gloomy, overcast, and foreboding. This is the London where the common man in the street usually needed a shave, a bath, and most likely used a tooth-brush only on rare occasions. 

In fact, Ritchie and his gaggle of screenwriters have re-imagined both Holmes and Watson. This is not your 1939 version with Basil Rathbone as Holmes - cerebral, nattily dressed, and most gentlemanly; and Nigel Bruce as Watson - stodgy, loyal, and most often far slower on the uptake requiring Holmes to often lead with, "Elementary, my dear Watson..." by way of explaining how his deductive powers arrived at an answer.


No sir,  Downey as Holmes is presented as a drunkard, a man completely lacking in personal hygiene, and one given to physical action at the drop of a hat. He not only figures things out - but he can more than hold his own with snappy repartee , or his fists or with a pistol.


Law has been given a new and improved Watson. This Watson is handsome, equally good with fists or a handgun, and he's no longer Holmes's aide-de-camp. He's on equal footing with Holmes and can snap-off a one-liner for laughs often besting Holmes.


Now before many of you take me to task for what I've just written - the reality is that nearly all of the prior film and television versions of Holmes and Watson sanitized Holmes. In Doyle's books, Holmes was often a layabout, a drug user, an abuser of Watson, and someone who most folks wouldn't want to be associated with. Ritchie has brought many of those elements back to the screen, and while this new 2009 Holmes may not be a pretty sight, he's not any less brilliant in solving the case, or beating the stuffing out of someone in a punch-out.
 
As a viewer you will have to deal with the fact that the film actually is divisible into quadrants which recycle themselves throughout the film:

Holmes and Watson - a bro-mance might be your first guess
Holmes and Adler - best described as a flame and moth attraction
Holmes and Watson versus Lord Blackwood - murders most foul with corpses and clues
Action Set Pieces - Brawls, explosions, firearms, and lots of CGI

The plot is a bit convoluted, and Ritchie gives us plenty of red-herrings and misdirection which certainly adds to the fun. In short, Holmes is fighting a villain who employs the black arts, magic, and a bit of the occult and super-natural to terrorize London, and to keep you as a viewer involved.



The film has some flaws - this London is dark and atmospheric. It is as if Ritchie has intentionally shown us an onscreen London distinctly matching and in tune with the mood of the story. But the artistry is marvelous - you can almost see the soot in the air.  And as often is the case in detective stories, we get a how-the-case-was-solved after the fact. However, the summation by Holmes is rattled off by Downey so rapidly, that you have to listen closely and even if you do you will still miss some of it. Which leads me to say, that this film will probably play better for you on a second and third replay at home via DVD.
 
This doesn't mean you won't enjoy yourself watching this in a packed movie house with a big screen and a theatrical sound system, because you definitely will.


 
Mark Strong does a wonderful turn as the nefarious Lord Blackwood. He's ice-cold, and he's nearly iconic as a dastardly villain.

Rachel McAdams as Irene Adler, a reoccurring character in the Doyle stories, is the hot flame to Downey's moth.  She is superb, but it could be argued that the role is under-written or is more salad dressing than salad.


In lesser and supporting  roles, Eddie Marsan as Inspector Lestrade of Scotland Yard, and Kelly Reilly as Mary Morstan, who is betrothed to Watson, bring life to what are essentially stock character roles.

Summarizing - this is a first class entertainment. While it doesn't have jaw-dropping visuals, or a plethora of slow-motion effects, it does have an excitement factor at the level of thrilling, and a sufficiency of intelligent writing that will sustain your interest rather than having you wish for the next action sequence to come asap.

I'll recommend the film and say that when you head out to your local cineplex to watch this film, you should set aside all your preconceived thoughts about Holmes. In short leave your old Holmes at home. As many have said - this is not your grandfather's Sherlock Holmes.

Recommendations: Chak De! India

Last updated: 2010-01-03 21:16:23 by JustMeMike

Sherlock Holmes (2009)

I never really imagined Sherlock Holmes as this type of dude. Robert Downey Jr. stars as the legendary London sleuth Sherlock  Holmes, joined by Jude Law as dear Dr. Watson, in this Guy Ritchie  reinvention of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s oft-adapted detective series.  Based on a comic book by producer Lionel Wigram, the story follows  Holmes and Watson as they face off against the villainous Blackwood  (Mark Strong). Rachel McAdams co-stars as quick-witted beauty Irene  Adler.
So as soon as I found out that this film was going to be directed by  one of my favorite’s, I was interested and curious at the same time. Why  would this guy get stuck with this type of material, and would it work?
To answer the question, it’s a sort of yes and kind of no. Guy  Ritchie’s pacing is quick and he does make the film a lot more fun that  what I was expecting. There is a lot of action sequences that are nice,  violent, and fun to watch. If the film just focused on his detective  ways, it wouldn’t have been as exciting as seeing a kick-ass detective,  breaking people’s jaws into two places. The way that the action works  its way into the film doesn’t at all slow it down once.
The editing in the film is top notch as well. In between present  moments of time are a plethora of moments involving Holmes recapping and  analyzing how he should proceed in his actions. These scenes are  beautifully executed and very well timed, allowing the viewers to really  get inside of Holmes’ head more effectively than any bit of dialogue  ever could. Although slow moving at first, the story builds to a climax  that brings all questions full circle and opens up room for a sequel by  introducing an element that any Holmes fan will notice was absent in  throughout most of the film. I won’t spoil it here but, needless to say,  I curiously await how well it shall be done in the sequel, should it  come to fruition.
Now when I mean no, is that Ritchie’s style of story-telling does get  a bit in the way. I felt that some stuff was put in the movie, just for  comedic relief, and not necessarily for the story. I was kind of  confused on how the case was actually getting solved by all the action,  and at points I was even confused what were the results of the case.
Other of Ritchie’s trade marks, however work very well. The  screenplay is rich with this sarcastic wit and humor that works very  well throughout the whole movie. Some action scenes and others with the  mystery involved were better with its light tone added with the humor.  Also, the way Ritchie uses his way of telling these little clues work  well, as you find out peace by peace the story.
Another problem I had with the film was the absence of any sense of  color and the setting. I mean yeah the setting was good-looking, but it  was just very grimy and very depressing. The story can be colorful at  points, but there was never really any great blend of rich colors to  stylize the movie more.
Probably the best element of the film is the acting by its two leads.  Downey Jr. is great as the sarcastic and colorful Sherlock, and  although sometimes the guy can be so goofy that we love him as a  wonderful lead. But the duo of him and Jude Law is what makes it the  best. Every time these two are on-screen it just feels like two  comedians who have known each others their whole lives, and just  continually riff on each other again and again. McAdams didn’t seem that  strong in this film, and plenty of the lines she had just seemed very  forced.
Consensus: Though Ritchie’s style doesn’t quite fit  the original material, Sherlock Holmes is a fast-paced, action mystery,  that has funny dialogue that gets even better with its performances from  the leads.
8/10=Matinee!!

(Read Less...)

life has its own ways of working out<br />
visit my movie review site at www.dtmmr.wordpress.com Feel Free to comment or request any movies at any time! :)

Sherlock Holmes: It’s Elementary…But Fun!

Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes has been touted as the start to a new film franchise.  With an all-star cast (Robert Downey, Jr. as Sherlock Holmes, Jude Law as Dr. Watson, Mark Strong as Lord Blackwood, Rachel McAdams as Forgettable-Female-Lead), it has all the necessary ingredients for a series of sequels.  Here’s the breakdown:
The movie starts with Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson catching secret society member and master occultist Lord Blackwood (who has been responsible for a series of murders).  Blackwood’s subsequent execution seems to be the end of another case for Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson…that is until Lord Blackwood rises from the dead.
What follows is an action-packed jaunt through Victorian England as Holmes and Watson try to solve the Mystery of the Undead Dark Magic User.  Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) shows up as Holmes’ ex-lover from New Jersey (hence the obvious lack of British accent), and acts as a tie between the intrepid sleuth and the shadowy Professor Moriarty (presumably the big baddie for later installments).
The Monkey: Robert Downey, Jr. is always fun to watch, although I couldn’t help but notice his turn as Sherlock was basically Tony Stark circa 1890.  Jude Law was surprisingly good in a smaller role than he usually plays.  Mark Strong delivered his dark and ominous lines with sufficient malice and crooked-tooth evil.  The action was suitably suspenseful, the mystery suitably mysterious.  The best part of the movie, however, was Hans Zimmer’s score.  In a word, perfect!  The banjo theme set the tone for the whole movie, and, I think, the whole series.  Playful yet dark, seedy yet sophisticated.
The Weasel: Being the start to a series, I assumed the audience would be treated to a bit more back story.  How did Watson and Holmes meet?  What is their history?  The movie hints at Watson’s military career, but it’s never explored.  The movie felt more like a second or third installment, instead of an establishing movie.  Rachel McAdams was sorely underused.  They could have cut her character completely with hardly any damage done to the plot.  She deserved better (the introduction of Professor Moriarty hints that she will have a bigger part to play in later movies).
As a whole, Sherlock Holmes delivers: fun action scenes, humour (with an “ou”) and an amazing score.  I wish there would have been more of an “origins” vibe, but I’m excited nonetheless to see how the characters grow in subsequent films.
3 Death Stars out of 5
http://hearculturepop.wordpress.com/2009/12/31/sherlock-holmes-it’s-elementary…but-fun/ 

Movie review: Sherlock Holmes (2009)

I was sceptical going into the theatre since I’m not really much of a  Guy Ritchie fan, but I have to say, he won me over with this one. It’s Snatch or Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels meets The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (the comic,  not the atrocious movie). It has all the hallmarks of a Ritchie film,  especially in the fight scenes, which are certainly his forté (and which  make sense, seing as the original Holmes was indeed somewhat of a  martial arts expert). It also has all the elements one would expect from  the Holmes universe: The pipe, the violin, the manic-depressive  behaviour, the love/hate relationship with Inspector Lestrade of the  Yard etc. All the nice little in-jokes were there, and fans of Sir  Arthur Conan Doyle’s original Holmes stories should love this.
Purists might choose to comment on the discrepancies, such as Robert Downey  Jr.’s Holmes being too scruffy, whereas the classic Holmes is neat  to the point of perfection. Granted. They are, however, missing an  important point: this is clearly supposed to be Holmes before  Holmes. It is supposed to be a younger version than the Holmes we  already know, and the story very obviously takes place before Doyle’s  stories. To me, this movie is to Basil  Rathbone’s or Jeremy  Brett’s Holmes what the new Star Trek  movie is to the original  series: a perfect example of how a reboot of a franchise should be  done – how to add something new and fresh while at the same time paying a  suitable amount of homage to the original.
As for the acting, Downey as Holmes and Jude Law as Watson are the perfect odd couple in this movie. Some might call it  homo-erotic undertones – well, judge for yourself. The on-screen  chemistry was positively electric (yeah, I know). Rachel McAdams is lovely as the female love  interest, and Mark Strong is equally sinister as the nefarious evil overlord (again: yeah, I  know).
Finally, without spoiling too much, let’s just say some of the things  introduced in this movie strongly suggest a sequel with even more  well-known elements of the classic Holmes universe – given a Ritchie  twist, to be sure. And if the casting rumours (spoiler alert!) about the main  antagonist for the sequel are true, I for one can’t wait…

(Read Less...)

&quot;In the bathtub of history, the truth is harder to hold than the soap, and much more difficult to find.&quot; - Terry Pratchett, Sourcery

Sherlock Holmes as reviewed by the Vulcan Stev family

VS: 1.9 pointed ears
I am not a Sherlock Holmes fan.  I ’ve read maybe one of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s novels.  I am familiar enough with the character that I know the basics.  From what I remember of the Holmes canon, this movie is a faithful interpretation of the character right down to Holmes’ use of cocaine (inferred in a scene but not mentioned on screen and my reason for a point 1 reduction).  That said I was sufficiently intrigued by the trailers to put this movie on my “See it if it comes to Grundy” list (Grundy being our local dollar theater).  I was not disappointed.  I enjoyed this film from start to finish.  The violence is not gratuitous and is used to depict Holmes’ analytical mind in more than one scene.  19th century London looked appropriately gritty and smog infested.  Given the state of special effects that shouldn’t surprise me but it did look nice.  I was also pleasantly surprised to find that Mrs VS enjoyed the movie (but I’ll let her tell why in her section).
Robert Downey Jr. played Holmes to the nines.  Never did I see a hint of Tony Stark, too often when I go to see a film I can be distracted by seeing too much of an actor’s previous performance.  Downey gave life to a character who could well be an ancestor of Tony Stark without calling on the previous character. 
I also failed to see the supposed “gay subtext” in this movie.  I suspect that blog rumors and pronouncements of the former  are from people who are over analyzing everything.   This movie goes in the DVD collection when it is released.
Mrs. VS: 1.5 pointed ears
This was a fairly decent movie.  The scenery was appropriate to the era being depicted.  It is not a good-looking movie, but then 19th century London was not a beautiful place.  I happen to like murder mysteries (ed note I didn’t know that) and this movie was rousing good mystery.  The man bursting into flames was a little gratuitous but understandable given the aspirations of the villain.
PIT #2: 2 pointed ears
This movie is the best movie of 2010 (OK it’s only February but it’s STILL a good movie).  This movie took everything that I knew about Sherlock Holmes and put it up on the screen.   You can be a complete Sherlock noob and still enjoy this movie.
PIT #3: 2 pointed ears
This movie rocked.  I didn’t see a single kissing scene.  Although there were no car chases, I understand that is because the automobile had not been invented in Holmes’ time (though we did get to see a large ship sink).
Overall 7.4 out of 8 ears
Families be warned the PG-13 rating is earned for depictions of (legal) drug use, depictions of cultic rituals and minor language.
Definitely a must-see if you get the chance.

Sherlock Holmes

My background in Sherlock Holmes is resorted mainly to cartoons and TV shows that use him as a reference. I have never read the books, but will get on that soon enough. Without prior knowledge of the character, you can imagine that I’m  more or less going in here with a clean slate, which can be a good or bad thing.
Sherlock Holmes offers a mix of action and some brief bits of comedy, but mostly we get this dry borderline drama story with a couple of weird twists at the end that totally change the way you see the entire film.
I’m always up for some good one-liners to lighten the mood of a film. THere is no need to be all serious. I’m sure there is bound to be someone out there who is going ot bash the comic elements, though.
The action wasn’t that great, to tell you the truth. Well, let me take that back. It is ok for what it is. Obviously, there ar no giant robots, car chases, or rapid gun battles, but it just feels as if it was forced into the story to make it “more appealing”.  Even the climactic battle atop the unfinished Tower Bridge didn’t quite seem to fit. Going even deeper…a few times Holmes narrates what he’s about to do to someone in a fight, and then does it. I actually liked this, and think they should have him do it a couple more times, rather than just abandon it like it seems they did.
Robert Downey, Jr. really got into this role, even going so far as learning old English. His dedication to the art shows, as he gives quite the performance and captures Holmes’ ego, and even his need to monologue about his methods and such.
Jude Law is not who I would have chosen as Dr. Watson, but from what I’ve heard and read, the Watson in the books is totally different from the one we are familiar with. If that is indeed the case, than maybe Law isn’t such a bad choice.
Rachel McAdams has an interesting character, but its obvious she’s just there to be a pretty face and introduce Moriarty (for possible future films).
Mark Strong did a pretty good job as Lord Blackwood. At times, he was even a bit creepy, which for someone who has risen from the dead, that’s what you expect.
One thing I could have done without was this strange drama between Holmes and Watson involving Watson leaving. Sure it makes for good sitcom fodder, but just didn’t work for me or this film.
I have never thought of Sherlock Holmes as an action hero, but rather a man of high intellect, so you can imagine my interest in the film was that of skepticism. There has been much hype surrounding this picture. Was it worth it? I can’t very well say that, but at the sam time I can’t say it’s not. Mu opinion is that when there is no action, the film falls into this thick stew of muck and doesn’t recover until the next action scene, then it repeats, only the muck gets thicker. I need to see this again to know for sure, but it seemed as if this film doesn’t know what it wants to be. Should it be a serious picture? Or an action/adventure? Maybe even an action comedy? It bounces from one genre to the other and never finds sure footing, so how can we, the audience know what to think? Well, here’s what I think, it doesn’t suck, but I can all but guarantee that this time next year, you won’t remember Sherlock Holmes for anything other than something to add to these actors resumes (of course with Downey, you’ll forget by this summer with the release of Iron Man 2).

http://thankyounetflix.wordpress.com

(Read Less...)

Sherlock Holmes: Robert Downey, Jr. is a god

Total Running Time: 128 minutes

Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Rachel McAdams, Satan Worshipers

I recently asked you (5) readers to tell me which movie I should see: Avatar or Sherlock Holmes. Avatar outweighed Sherlock Holmes in all your responses so I concluded that, for my fan base (of 5 readers) I would go to Avatar and give you the scoop if you haven’t seen the movie already.

To get the full experience of Avatar, I wanted to go to the only IMAX 3-D theatre they have here in Oklahoma. What I didn’t expect when I got there was for all the movie times to be sold out! I didn’t want to forgo my movie-going experience (something I get very little of these days) just because I could see Avatar… so I decided to go ahead and see Sherlock Holmes.

It wasn’t in 3D and it wasn’t in the IMAX theatre… but it was still awesome.

I can’t help but wonder how exactly RDJ got so lucky as to happen upon two films (Iron Man and Sherlock Holmes) that will produce multiple sequels (Sherlock Holmes left its ending open for a sequel). Also… with Tony Stark/Iron Man appearing in a cameo after the credits of the most recent “Incredible Hulk” movie… it appears he may have a third franchise of films (The Avengers… supposedly coming in 2012) in which he could take part.

This is the same guy who was black-out drunk and wandered into a neighbors Malibu home late one night thinking it was his own and falling asleep on the neighbors bed! This is the same guy who couldn’t seem to get his drug problem contained and most entertainment media outlets wrote him off as a lost cause!  A judge threw him in prison to “save his life” since he couldn’t get his substance abuse problem under control!  It appeared he was on the downward spiral to be the latest casualty of Hollywood excess.

But somewhere… somehow… in the infinite grace of Someone (!?) he made quite a rebound.  In fact, perhaps a little of his excess, made him an even better actor… because he came back from the brink.

First came Zodiac.

Then came Tropic Thunder.

Then came the almighty Iron Man.

Everything he touched turned to gold.  How could he not rock the movie out as much as he did?

The story has a particularly scary plot that deals with a dude name Lord Blackwood who just so happens to be a Satanist (or is he?) who SH foils right at the beginning of the movie before committing another human sacrifice. Before Lord Blackwood is hanged for his evil deeds, he vows to return from the grave only to wreak more havoc than before.

When this actually happens… then the sleuthing begins.

I enjoyed the movie very much. It’s a welcome revamping of the SH character that we’ve never really seen before. As a kid I remember SH being an older guy with a trench coat and a magnifying glass. In this installment, he’s a badass. He knows kung fu and shit! Alright… maybe not kung fu… but he knows how to take a punch and he knows how to give one even better.

As he was in Iron Man… RDJ plays the part stupendously. He doesn’t even appear to be acting! In the same way Mickey Rourke (before boxing/plastic surgery) seemed to effortlessly channel the characters he played so does RDJ in such a way that it feels you’re watching real life events happening right in front of you!

Also, I’ve been told by multiple ladies (aka my sisters and nieces) that RDJ makes them squeal like they did when they used to read “Teen Bop” magazine. From what they tell me… he’s somewhat of a stud I guess.


Jenni… stop drooling on your computer.  The keys will start to stick if you do that too much.

Jude Law is okay as Sherlock’s right hand man: Dr. John Watson. He’s not as badass… but he’s acceptable. I’m still mad at him for cheating on Sienna Miller with their nanny. What a twerp.

Rachel McAdams plays the love interest: Irene Adler. I just love her. She’s just so cutesy wootsy. But… unfortunately in this movie… she’s somewhat expendable to me. I loved her in movies like “Mean Girls”, “The Notebook” and “Red Eye”… but I didn’t see this movie as one of my more favorite vehicles for her.


C’mon now… you can’t get much more wholesome or “cutesy wootsy” than her…

Mr. Satanist Man, Lord Blackwood, is good. He’s scary. He’s mean. He’s evil. He’s everything he needs to be to make you wonder if he’s really channeling the devil… or not! I’ll stop before I give too much away.

Avatar may be the first vehicle of a new movie-going experience… but I can’t imagine that it can have as great and unique a storyline as Sherlock Holmes.

I give Sherlock Holmes five out of five ShamWOW! guys:

Read more about me and what's in my crazy mind at www.handstowar.wordpress.com

Last updated: 2010-02-16 20:53:52 by papak