It's really rather elementary. Let's Review Sherelock Holmes!

Recommended Videos

RentCavalier

New member
Dec 17, 2007
334
0
0
Hey guys, it's me again, the guy who only reviews when he damn well feels like it. Please read this and then say I'm ripping off Yahtzee.

---

Sherelock Holmes is a literary mythic hero, a character so long-lasting, so eternal that no single story can possibly encapsulate his essence. Guy Ritchie, however, has done his best with this, his latest work, and in the process created one of the sharpest, slickest, funniest and most stylish movie of the year.

The movie assumes you know who Holmes is--eccentric detective consultant living with his hetero lifemate in 221 Baker's Street in cheery ole London town--and starts off with a frantic chase through the great city's back alleys and seedy underbelly. Establishing its titular hero, his eternal companion Watson, in broad strokes, we see that this movie is exemplifying an underplayed aspect of Holmes' character--that is, his ability to horribly, painfully wreck one's shit.

Yes, the first thing ANYONE noticed about the trailers to this movie was that Holmes had taken a level in bad-ass, and was seen gallantly diving out windows, boxing shirtless in a gambling den, tackling a giant with a maul, and engaging in all manner of kung-fu tomfoolery. My one concern going into this movie was that it might get too caught up in turning Sherelock Holmes into a Victorian-era Chuck Norris and ignore the most essential aspect of any Holmes story--the actual mystery.

Fortunately, that is not the case. The story revolves around a villainous man called Lord Blackwell, played imperiously by Guy Ritchie favorite Mark Strong, an occultist murderer whom Holmes and Watson capture in the film's opening. Exemplifying the distinctly English ability to be both brooding, sophisticated, sinister and smarmy all at once, Strong makes an excellent foil to Watson and Holmes, dominating every scene he's in with a savage, demonic brutality. The story fast-forwards three months, to the day before Blackwell's execution by hanging, where Watson and Holmes are in the midst of dealing with an even worse adversary: room mate drama.

Watson is moving out you see, to live with his lady love, and Holmes is none too pleased, as he feels betrayed by his erstwhile companion, whilst Watson is reluctant to leave behind the life of adventure and mayhem that Holmes naturally generates around himself. The relationship between Holmes and Watson is at the core of the film, and the chemistry between Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law is tighter than than a Victorian corset. Their constant bickering, soulful glances, and snappy conversations make even the most banal of conversations entertaining, and the script is cut tight enough to avoid having their bromance stall the story. Holmes is dragged back onto the case when an old flame of his, Irene Adler (played by the ever-sexy Rachel McAdams) a sultry, seductive master thief whom Holmes considers an intellectual equal, tasks him to find a missing man. The case spirals into chaotic heights as Blackwell apparantly rises from the dead, and drives a murderous trail right into the heart of London's cultural sphere.

The city of London is Guy Ritchie's playground in this movie. There's plenty of sweeping shots of the metropolis in its Victorian heydey, when filth stained the streets and the whole populace was going mad with occultist fever. We see a constant conflict of new industry and scientific discovery and old mysticism and ritual, meshing violently on rain-slicked city streets. For once in a Sherelock Holmes story, we actually see the public effect of his dramatic cases--Blackwell paints himself as a hellish Antichrist, and his theatrical style--alleged black sorcery--drives all of Britain mad with fear.

It's hard to say what makes this movie work. The dialogue is sharp and funny, the case is intriguing and mysterious, and the action is kinetic and powerful. Ritchie matured as a filmmaker long ago, and his mastery of the craft is evident in just about every shot. Each fight scene is filmed uniquely, and his careful camerawork showcase important clues to the greater mystery without being too revealing. However, more important than any of that, this movie invokes the SPIRIT of Sherelock Holmes. At the heart of every Holmes story there's a conflict between reason and logic and blind faith and superstition. Holmes is a pragmatic champion of reason, pulling aside the magician's curtain to reveal the all-too-real mechanisms behind his tricks. This spirit is perfectly preserved in this latest incarnation, and draws heavily from the simple, but elegant mythos behind the character himself. Holmes has been updated to fit the modern era--no big magnifying glass or floppy brown hat this time. This Holmes is a gritty, fast-paced, pseudo-lunatic, a mad scientist in a mad world, and the movie seems far more interested in his tortured genius than anything else.

This threatens to weaken the film's emotional center, the relationship between Holmes and Watson, and at times it almost does so, pushing the line of acceptability but never crossing it. In the end, this is a modern mystery, full of style and substance that both acknowledges the great history behind the character whilst at the same time taking him into the next generation with roaring applause an impeccable wit. Robert Downey Jr has never been better, flipping between a fiending addict to a cultured scholar sometimes in the space of a single sentence. This is THE movie to see this winter, and the finest Sherelock Holmes story in recent memory.

The game is afoot, and the game is good.

Crowning Moment of Awesome:
With so many funny and kick-ass moments throughout the story, I've decided to be a film nerd and pick a serious, and highly cinematic scene. There's a point where Holmes, Watson and Irene Adler are negotiating a series of nefarious traps set by the villain. Escaping one trap after another, they're making their getaway when Watson trips a wire and sets off a massive explosion. For about two minutes, we see the characters desperately trying to escape, being blasted back and forth by tons of explosions, and the music swells. Everything goes slow-mo and we see Holmes desperately trying to save the lives of the two people dearest to him, in a scene where his wit and smarts can only do so much, and for the first time in the film, we seriously begin to doubt whether our heroes will live to see the day. It's a powerful scene, aided by excellent cinematography. Guy Ritchie is a master of slow-mo, which is funny to say, as he doesn't use that much of it in this film...but that's precisely why it is so effective. Zack Snyder uses slow-motion all the time, and it can easily drag a movie's flow down. Ritchie, on the other hand, will use slow-motion only when it would be MOST effective, not when it would merely be effective, and this scene in particular is almost haunting in how good it is, and how much of an emotional impact it carries.
 

WolfThomas

Man must have a code.
Dec 21, 2007
5,291
0
0
Good review, I haven't seen this but I've heard a lot of people complaining about the gritty-ing up Sherlock Holmes. These people often haven't read the books where I can remember:

-Someone having acid thrown in their face.
-A lot of people dying, a lot of bittersweet cases where maybe only one person survives or someone dies and they catch the villain.
-Sherlock Holmes during cocaine, morphine and opium. Opium not even being considered a drug.
-Sherlock and Watson rocking around armed with guns a lot.
-Sherlock being a master pugilist (that said most middle-upper class males had some bare knuckled boxing experience from school and college boxing)
-Sherlock going weeks without bathing.
 

RentCavalier

New member
Dec 17, 2007
334
0
0
BrynThomas said:
Good review, I haven't seen this but I've heard a lot of people complaining about the gritty-ing up Sherlock Holmes. These people often haven't read the books where I can remember:

-Someone having acid thrown in their face.
-A lot of people dying, a lot of bittersweet cases where maybe only one person survives or someone dies and they catch the villain.
-Sherlock Holmes during cocaine, morphine and opium. Opium not even being considered a drug.
-Sherlock and Watson rocking around armed with guns a lot.
-Sherlock being a master pugilist (that said most middle-upper class males had some bare knuckled boxing experience from school and college boxing)
-Sherlock going weeks without bathing.
I'll say this: 3-6 are in the movie in some form. I don't think Holmes specifically does any particular drug, but there's some implication that he's on some VERY unsavory substances. And, interestingly, Watson is more trigger-happy than Holmes. Holmes has a more hands-on approach to dealing with attackers.
 

WolfThomas

Man must have a code.
Dec 21, 2007
5,291
0
0
RentCavalier said:
I'll say this: 3-6 are in the movie in some form. I don't think Holmes specifically does any particular drug, but there's some implication that he's on some VERY unsavory substances. And, interestingly, Watson is more trigger-happy than Holmes. Holmes has a more hands-on approach to dealing with attackers.
Awesome. What I always found funny was while Sherlock did mainly cocaine, sometimes morphine and these were frowned on by Watson, so he eventually weaned himself off them. But laudanum was often consumed which is opium and alcohol and that was never criticized once.

That said, the conditions of industrial revolution London where so appalling that alcohol would have been necessary to kill germs and the constipation side effects of opium would have evened out the diarrhea from poor food and water sanitation.
 

Jandau

Smug Platypus
Dec 19, 2008
5,030
0
0
Solid review. Maybe some pictures to spice things up a bit would be welcome, but that's just nitpicking.

As for the movie, I've seen it a few days ago and I must admit it was awesome fun. It was fun in a similar way that Pirates of the Carribean were fun - a family-friendly action flick made awesome by the leading men and great action sequences. As for "grittyness" of the movie, there's more grit in the average episode of House...
 

RentCavalier

New member
Dec 17, 2007
334
0
0
I dunno about that...the movie has some disturbing imagery, and most of the humor is squarely adult in nature. I don't think a child would be able to follow the plot that well.
 

tomtom94

aka "Who?"
May 11, 2009
3,370
0
0
RentCavalier said:
I dunno about that...the movie has some disturbing imagery, and most of the humor is squarely adult in nature. I don't think a child would be able to follow the plot that well.
But it's got Sherlock Holmes in it, it must be for kids!
I do question the establishment when stuff like The Dark Knight (and this) get a 12A rating, almost certainly solely to increase revenue for the companies behind them.

I'm going to see this at some point in the near future. Should be good :D
 

McHanhan

New member
Sep 13, 2009
475
0
0
I liked the review, I cant wait to see the movie.

BrynThomas said:
Good review, I haven't seen this but I've heard a lot of people complaining about the gritty-ing up Sherlock Holmes. These people often haven't read the books where I can remember:

-Someone having acid thrown in their face.
-A lot of people dying, a lot of bittersweet cases where maybe only one person survives or someone dies and they catch the villain.
-Sherlock Holmes during cocaine, morphine and opium. Opium not even being considered a drug.
-Sherlock and Watson rocking around armed with guns a lot.
-Sherlock being a master pugilist (that said most middle-upper class males had some bare knuckled boxing experience from school and college boxing)
-Sherlock going weeks without bathing.
I agree completely, though I am not sure about a part where Opium was not considered a drug. Watson himself had commented several times that he had a hard time helping homes through his addiction.

Oh and the violin, Holmes loves his violin.
 

WolfThomas

Man must have a code.
Dec 21, 2007
5,291
0
0
McHanhan said:
I agree completely, though I am not sure about a part where Opium was not considered a drug. Watson himself had commented several times that he had a hard time helping homes through his addiction
Watson definitely helped him with addiction but the thing is opium and alcohol or laudanum was considered medicine not a drug of addiction at the time. I don't think he ever smoked opium though, I remember a couple of critical comments on opium dens.
 

McHanhan

New member
Sep 13, 2009
475
0
0
BrynThomas said:
McHanhan said:
I agree completely, though I am not sure about a part where Opium was not considered a drug. Watson himself had commented several times that he had a hard time helping homes through his addiction
Watson definitely helped him with addiction but the thing is opium and alcohol or laudanum was considered medicine not a drug of addiction at the time. I don't think he ever smoked opium though, I remember a couple of critical comments on opium dens.
Hm, well it's been a while. I do remember Holmes having an Opium addiction from a case (maybe it was "the man with the twisted lip") or something along that lines. Holmes was investigating a disappearance of a man that occurred in an opium den and Watson was narrating how he feared that the environment would bring back his addiction which he had overcome with some difficulty.
 

Cyberjester

New member
Oct 10, 2009
496
0
0
RentCavalier said:
I dunno about that...the movie has some disturbing imagery, and most of the humor is squarely adult in nature. I don't think a child would be able to follow the plot that well.
Sherlock Holmes wasn't really a children's book.. I got one of those "collection of the best Holmes stories" books, and they were pretty twisted.. Teen, yes, pre-teen no.


RentCavalier said:
Hey guys, it's me again, the guy who only reviews when he damn well feels like it. Please read this and then say I'm ripping off Yahtzee.
Unless Yahtzee now does movie reviews and just did one on Holmes, I can't see how you'd be ripping him off.. You didn't pick it apart. =P


BrynThomas said:
McHanhan said:
I agree completely, though I am not sure about a part where Opium was not considered a drug. Watson himself had commented several times that he had a hard time helping homes through his addiction
Watson definitely helped him with addiction but the thing is opium and alcohol or laudanum was considered medicine not a drug of addiction at the time. I don't think he ever smoked opium though, I remember a couple of critical comments on opium dens.
Nah, he definitely had opium in a few of the books.