Escape to the Movies: Sherlock Holmes

[Batfred]

Now this made me angry. Intelligence, pacing and subtly replaced by action, violence and slapstick - that my friend is commonly referred to as dumming down. Guy Ritchy had no business murdering classics like this. I have read the books, I am a Sherlock Holmes fan - I am not a 'Sherlockian' and I am open to other interpretations but this is taking the piss.
Why do these people think every story out there needs to be diluted and mashed into a paste that can be spoon-fed to the masses in the form of a block-buster. This is not Sherlock Holmes and if movie bob was a fan he would know that! If you can't make a faithful and respectful version then why bother! there are other stories that will welcome expensive special affects and popular American actors.

So far the greatest and most faithful interpretation was the TV serialisation with Jeremy Brett as Holmes, why? it was subtle and deeply intelligent - the very essence of Sherlock Homles:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzdUZ2PpcMY&feature=related

After seeing a trailer for the movie I thought for a long time afterwards that is was a comic version and even then I thought it was bad.

If you like this interpretation you are damaging future films or worse, literature. You are supporting the Bill Murray Character in Scrooged as he likewise defiles A Christmas Carol. I have seen this film, I think it's important to know what I am talking about, Robert Downey Junior's performance is typical of him, I'm not saying he's bad I'm saying he's the completely wrong actor for the part, likewise the Watson Fellow - these are Not Arthur Conan Doyle's Characters. I think everyone who worked on the Movie, or praised it in a review, should be ashamed.

An interesting and well penned appraisal and everyone is welcome to their opinion, but 1: Jude Law is English and 2: Don't be dissing the Murray in Scrooged. It (Scrooged) was a film that was meant to be a little oddball and not meant to be taken seriously. Do you really think that they would have cast Bill Murray if they wanted a true take on a modernised Dickensian New York? No, me neither.

Murray is great, the film (Scrooged) is infinitely watchable (every poxy Christmas) and although I haven't see the full review of Holmes due to some IT issue that a few Escapists seem to be having, I can get the gist via the responses. As to making you angry, a little strong don't you think? You know that you don't have to watch these features if they envoke that kind of emotion?

 

[Deacon Cole]

It rears its ugly head in the otherwise amazing "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes" as well, not to mention that terrible, terrible thing about pyramids and scooby doo-like drug induced walking CG stained glass.

I haven't seen Private Life of Sherlock Holmes [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066249/], but a quick glance at IMDb says is has something to do with the Loch Ness monster. The pyramids and stained glass hallucinations was in Young Sherlock Holmes [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090357/]. I also thought of this film when bob explained the Dan Brown plot. So, this kind of thing is not new to Holmes

 

[angryantlion]

First of all I would like to make clear that I love Bill Murray and I think Scrooged is a fantastic version of A Christmas Carol and is one of my favourite Christmas films of all time. What I meant was the version of A Christmas Carol his Character was producing within the film, the one he was going to have air live on Christmas day. However A Christmas Carol is a simple and familiar moral tale that can survive radically different interpretations whilst maintaining the essence of the story, however, I believe this film takes a beloved series full of detail, structure and subtle story-telling and warps it into a hideous action comedy that losses all sight of what made it great in the first place. I agree with the man who said "the connection with the actual Sherlock Holmes ends with character names and occupations".

I would also say that all emotion (anger especially) is important when responding to films, books or indeed other critical responses. People do not have to agree with me but having all these varied ideas is vital when evaluating any media. I know other people share my outrage so it is important that we too give our opinions, even if we are dismissed as bile spewing snobs.

 

[Angelus SnV]

I can't seem to get it to play past 2:53...i mean, i can click somethin' farther down t'skip ahead, then it'll play for about 8 secconds and freeze again...what gives?

 

[angryantlion]

I would agree with you to a degree but I'd say there is far more to each interpretation than just saying 'It is a product of its time' I'd even question the importance of that fact. In my opinion The real brilliance of "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" was in Brett's outstanding performance and faithfulness to the book, regardless of the context of production it is the truest on screen adaptation of Sherlock Holmes, it is timeless.

I hate this idea that we must surrender to the trend of action-packed trash dominating the cinema and sit back as flagging directors begin to plunder classic literature for more ideas. As I have said, some things can take different interpretations for instance that modern day version of "Romeo and Juliet" and that up coming "Alice in Wonderland" which I am sure I will enjoy (possibly in 3D) when it comes out.

But these stories are so crafted, so fully formed that big changes can only detract. Just because Guy Ritchie isn't up to the task of making a Sherlock Holmes that would work in the cinema whilst being loyal to the original isn't an excuse for him to make one that isn't. Sometimes directors need know what's fair game and what should be left alone.

 

[VaioStreams]

well this will make me see this movie. but i have to agree with the Dr. House statement at the end.

 

[Littaly]

And what does VR mean? Apart from Virtual Reality?

VR stands for victoria regina, and was the royal cypher of Queen Victoria (the monarch at the time of Holmes). In one of the short stories, I forget which, Holmes is bored, and so decorates the wall opposite him with a "patriotic VR" in bullet holes, despite Watson protesting that pistol practice should be a "strictly outdoors pastime".

Thank you

 

[Nurb]

now that it's monday can we get a re-upload of this video pleeeease?

 

[Varewulf]

I am still having trouble, at 2:15. Tried both Opera and IE, and it stops at the same place in both browsers, which is somewhat peculiar to me, and very frustrating.

 

[MarsProbe]

The video pauses for me as well, around 3:24. And before any smug jerks ask if I "refreshed the page", I'm going to bring them through my own little exercise in deductive reasoning.

Fact 1: I am not an idiot.
Fact 2: My job involves working with computers.
Therefore, we can deduce Fact 3: YES I KNOW HOW TO WORK A COMPUTER, PLEASE DON'T POST UNHELPFUL, CONDESCENDING, PATRONIZING BS IN RESPONSE.

Have you tried refresing the page?

Sorry, my first post in a good number of days, so I had to make it something I found enjoyable! That, and there was no way I was going to miss that opportunity!

 

[JelloKZ]

I thought Holmes fanboys were called Holmesians... whatever.

 

[Chrissyluky]

i had a feeling this would go the way of pirates of the Caribbean sadly i think i was right.

 

[Deacon Cole]

I thought Holmes fanboys were called Holmesians... whatever.

I thought they were called Baker Street Irregulars. But what the hell do I know?

 

[Deacon Cole]

Just because House fails to engage me, and thus, eludes me of the Holmes/House connection doesn't mean I'm uninformed, at all. It just means I found something more entertaining with a character - or characters - I can connect with better; and stories I'm more into.

In fact, the point that House fails to engage me is, for me, the basis of the opinion that House isn't quite the kind of show I want to watch. And so I don't.

I tried it, I didn't like it, I formed an opinion about it. A properly informed opinion of House through trial and error that relates to my enjoyment of it.

Now, if I were to state something like; "House is a poorly contrived show, lacking in any redeemable quality, and a pure waste of any viewers time", that would be an uniformed opinion. But I didn't; despite your clumsy editing. I merely said that the show fails to engage *ME*, and so I didn't catch the whole Holmes/House thing; though I have attempted to watch the show, on more than one occasion.

So, because you do not like the show is why you do not think House is based on Holmes?

 

[snide_cake]

I'm still on the fense about Downey Jr. playing Holmes. All the actors in Britan and they got an American to play him?

Yes but Robert Downey Jnr is amazing with his accents.

See: Tropic Thunder, where he is an american portraying a negro portraying an Aussie. His Australian accent was very good.

A little backwards there. He plays an Aussie (probably a Russel Crowe rip) portaying an African American.

Ah cheers, it's been a while since I've seen the movie

 

[Deacon Cole]

Really? After twice saying I didn't see the connection because I've never been able to get into the show enough to notice it...? Here, let me help you:

IronChuck watch show. IronChuck no like show. Ironchuck stop watching show. IronChuck not see Holmes/House connection because IronChuck not watch show he not like.

Kemantari's astute point to me, that the show was intended as a derivative of Holmes, as well as Movie Bob's drawing the connection to House, does make me worry if this movie is going to be worth my $11 plus to go see in the theatre, now

So you're just boring us with your dislike for House all this time for no real reason. Well, thanks.