• Sherlock Holmes

    We couldn’t have picked a better film for our New Year’s Eve midnight movie. This is Sherlock Holmes as he was written, not the boring dude from the previous incarnations who figured out everything with a smug “Elementary, my dear Watson” (which he never said in the books).

    Ok, so maybe it was a little over-the-top with the ‘splosions. And I would have liked to have it slowed down just a teensy bit in order to actually process Holmes’ revelations of his deductive reasoning. But for once the use of the Matrix-like super slow mo to highlight action is put to good use.

    I loved the fact that Jude Law’s Watson wasn’t some bumbling goof that just followed Holmes around in amazement. He’s an active partner, and he keeps Holmes from spinning off into either depression or depravity.

    I can’t wait for the sequel.

    Friday, January 1st, 2010 at 10:56
  • Ric The Schmuck
    Friday, January 1st, 2010 at 11:16 | #1

    Happy New Year!

    Glad to hear you liked Sherlock. After Jacob gushed over it, I was curious to hear another opinion.

    Well, gotta go. They say we might get 2 feet of snow over the next couple of days, how wonderful.

  • bran!
    Sunday, January 3rd, 2010 at 23:27 | #2

    I was afraid I would hate it, bc it looks like they’ve got Holmes engaging in fisticuffs, which is so un-Holmes like (and I am loathe to sit through an entire film with Rachel McAdams in it; I just dread her weepy-eyed face.) Though I do like the Jude Law Watson. Jude Law anything, really.

  • Monday, January 4th, 2010 at 07:36 | #3

    But that’s just it, Holmes is NOT averse to fisticuffs in the books! He’s a great boxer, a master swordsman, and has knowledge of bartitsu (which was what he used to defeat Moriarty and fling him to his death over a waterfall). It’s only the prior movie adaptations that put him in a silly hat, smoking a crooked pipe and coolly looking through a magnifying glass.

  • Sherri
    Monday, January 4th, 2010 at 13:01 | #4

    Holmes was always a Victorian Action Man — he never had a problem landing a few well timed blows when required. My big complaint was that the fight scenes went on far too long, eating up time making the point that Watson and Holmes could, indeed, fight, when I really wanted more of what we look to Holmes for — the deduction, the exploration, the little tiny details coming together. That, unfortunately, was covered with a bit of handwaving. Also, some little loose threads left floating (why did the sacrificial victim attempt to kill herself? Were all those murders really necessary to build up Blackwood’s big bad rep, or was he just that much of a sicko? )

    Rachel McAdams was in the wrong film. Yech! Too young, for one thing, even in this far-fetched version of Irene Adler. Ickily too young. They could have done better if they’d just tried. Feh. I want to avoid her. I want to digitally remove her and replace her with someone else. Someone within 5 years of RDJ, preferably. Someone who actually looks smart.

    DVD is on the “to get” list. Any rumors about a sequel?

  • Monday, January 4th, 2010 at 13:24 | #5

    Yeah, I thought McAdams was the weakest link by far. I would have liked to have seen someone Holmes would be impressed by…plus, it would have made her ultimate trap by the “real” bad guy (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) a lot more gripping. As it was, she seemed like she could have been used as a pawn by you-know-who without him batting an eyelash…not exactly requiring a supra-genius. Also, it made Holmes look like he was just smitten with her looks and not her braiiiiiiins.

  • Monday, January 4th, 2010 at 13:34 | #6

    Oh, and the sequel rumours have Brad Pitt as Moriarty…

  • Sherri
    Monday, January 4th, 2010 at 23:54 | #7

    Brad….Pitt? Uh, no. Please, no. Even with the hobo nasty beard he’s sporting, no.

Comments are closed.