I am curious if anyone saw the new Sherlock Holmes movie and what their thoughts were. I saw the movie and in and of itself I enjoyed it very much. However, I didn't think it kept with the characters very well.

But I read this, written back in the summer, and it gives a little food for thought:
http://www.movie-moron.com/?p=6740

Regardless, I thought it was a fun movie and enjoyed it.

Views: 29

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Yes, saw it and loved it. Loved the feel of history in looking at London in the 1880's. Loved the physicality of this version of Holmes--and especially loved the way they made Watson an intellectual equal to Holmes.

As to not being by-the-book Holmes. I actually agree with the article listed. By inference, Holmes could built up exactly like the image portrayed on film.
I guess I am the odd man out. I liked it "okay" but to me it was rental material. Nothing that I wouldn't have loved to have saved money on, meaning not worth 8.50. Not a blockbuster movie. I sort of felt myself nodding off in spots. The accents were hard to understand at times and some of the plot was predictable. Sorry!
I saw the movie a week ago and loved it. Both actors were great--Downey and Jude Law--and I believe the new spin revitalized the characters. I am eager to buy the DVD when it comes out in Blue Ray. Guy Ritchie's directing was very fascinating, also. I've only read the short stories and not the S.H. novels, so now I'm curious to read those and compare the original characters to the movie. I also have a bio on Arthur Conan Doyle I've been meaning to read; I'm now eager to open it. I think the movie will help draw interest to the many different book serials featuring the characters.

Last year I picked up a middle grade novel featuring the character Enola Holmes, younger sister of Sherlock and Mycroft. Goal was just to keep up on what the kids are reading, but I got hooked and have read all of them. I don't recall the author, but the writing was very clever and engaging.

By the way, wasn't it amazing that an excellent movie could be made that didn't have bad language and sex? I've been overseas recently and was embarrassed by the raunchy movies that were playing from the USA in Europe.
I have been defending this film to skeptical friends. I believe people have captured with Jeremy Brett disease. They can't imagine a Holmes who is physical and possesses a sense of wit and playfulness. However, Doyle's character had a wry sense of humor and could be cruel. He was also, as the article notes, an expert at physical conflict and the dark side of London.

One of the problems this film is facing is the freakish negative bias offered by those who are too loyal to a strict reading of the canon. I consider canon, whether its Doyle or Lovecraft, to be a structure within which writers can play. All blues are based on a twelve bar structure, but not all blues are the same. Writers and film makers should have a sense of freedom and creativity in riffing on the tropes.
I agree Stewart.

One of the things that some people can't do is judge a movie based on a novel on its own merits strictly as a movie.

The Road is an example. I loved the novel. I think the movie is very good and fairly loyal to the book. Sure, it can't really compare to the book, but it is a GOOD movie in my opinion.

Same with Sherlock Holmes. I loved the stories. I really enjoyed the movie.
I enjoyed the movie, too, Clay. Downey and Law are excellent actors. However, as in most Hollywood movies today, physical action was used to gin up suspense instead of the interaction between characters. There had to be at least 4 or 5 fight scenes in the movie and the results are so predictable. For true mystery suspense, I'm reminded of some of the great Hitchcock movies like Strangers on a Train, Dial M for Murder and Rear Window in which Jimmy Stewart was confined to a wheelchair the whole movie. Hitchcock knew how to create suspense without a great deal of physical action. I hope there's a young director out there who can once again create some "adult" suspense and crime dramas.
I like Hitchcock. Rear Window was simply marvelous. I thought the remake - Disturbia? - wasn't too bad. Doesn't stand up to Rear Window though.
I agree. I would have preferred more dialogue and less action.
I recently saw "The Lovely Bones" and it is far more suspenseful than the "Holmes" movie. All the actors are good, but Stanley Tucci is absolutely terrific as the twisted serial killer, especially in the scene where he lures the young girl into a deadly trap.
I saw it on New Year's weekend and enjoyed it. Yes, it was "Hollywood-ized" and could have had more depth, but I liked Jude Law as a Watson who could hold his own, and I enjoyed seeing Robert Downey, Jr.'s interpretation of Holmes. It did have an Indiana Jones meets Jack the Ripper feel to it, but I enjoyed it anyway. Besides, Doyle's Holmes was described as a man of action, even though the stories didn't always illustrate that.
I went to see it the day it was released in the UK - I was dragged along by my family, having read nothing in the line of reviews and not quite sure what to expect.

But, I have to admit it was an entertaining film! I liked the fact that they included all the 'iconic' character traits - like pipe-smoking and playing the violin - but with a quirky twist to them!

However, I don't think I'd bother buying it on DVD but I'd maybe rent it.

I'm not a great lover of either Robert Downey Jr or Jude Law but I'd happily go and see a sequel (whenever it arrives!)
I saw the film yesterday and enjoyed it. I thought Downey and Law were excellent.

RSS

CrimeSpace Google Search

© 2019   Created by Daniel Hatadi.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service