Post by Eddie Love on Mar 27, 2010 13:45:43 GMT -5
I agree completely with you guys on Sherlock Holmes. Loved it. Was afraid it would be ruined with supernatural or anachronistic business, but I had a great time. Loved the period flavor. That scene in the restaurant with Watson and his intended had a richness of detail similar to Richard Lester's Musketeer pictures. Downey and Law were both terrific and I agree Law was especially good. I would say they did a bolder re-imagining of his character than Holmes, making Watson more of a temperamental man of action.
The reviews I saw of this were way off and seemed based on what people thought the film was gonna be (and what is was frankly advertised as) and not what was really on the screen. Yes, this wasn't your great-grandfather's Sherlock Holmes. But you know what? The original Holmes stories are simply not cinematic. They tend to be one quarter another character setting up the mystery and end with one quarter of the culprit explaining himself with a middle portion actually involving Holmes doing his detecting. Great stuff, but that's not a great basis for a film. That's why the best Holmes films aren't derived from the Doyle canon.
I do hope they continue this as a series and that future entries don't simply re-hash this first film, i.e, I don't want Lord Blackwell to reappear. (I kind of wish they had killed off the Irene Adler character as well.)
Last I heard, Eddie there was not only a SHERLOCK HOLMES 2 being planned but a SHERLOCK HOLMES 3 and 4 as well. I'll wait until they actually hit the theater as I'm still pissed because I didn't get the ACTION JACKSON 2, 3 and 4 I was promised years ago...
Post by morbiousfod on Mar 29, 2010 21:28:51 GMT -5
I have to agree with you guys that the movie was great, and am quite relieved that they didn't screw it up too much. I personally could have went through the whole movie without the love interest in the form of Irene Adler, but that's just me. I feel that Holmes is part of the same asexual tribe as Doctor Who, he is almost obvious to women, and I was fine with that. I was a bit annoyed that they had to take a one story character and change her enough to fit into this hollywood idea that every lead character has to have a love interest. Yet I won't toss the whole movie just because of this country's inability to imagine a hero who isn't chasing skirts. Holmes has been reimagined so many times that you really can't get caught up in one interpretation of the character. Personally I prefer the Jeremy Brett version of Holmes.
I am hoping that the rest of the movies will be able to hold up as well, yet I have heard rumblings that the Conan Doyle estate is up in arms that the creators want to portray the character as gay. Yet again Hollywood can't stand having a character that isn't desperately looking for nookie, so he must be gay. Sheesh. I hope this was just a rumor.