Movie Review: Sherlock Holmes

There was a buzz among some when it was suggested that Robert Downey Jr. was going to play the classic Holmes. I and several of my friends were hopeful for a film that would honor the books, and still touch upon the proper English nature that Basil Rathbone presented so well.

Then news that Moriarity would not be in the film. Then came the movie trailers. Full of displays of fighting and raw brute strength without a hint of the supreme logic that defines Holmes. And hopes were dimmed.

The fact that the film came out in December for the holidays was an oddity. One that became clear once the film is seen. It also explains why the film was not the stellar financial success than many other films featuring Downey and Jude Law have been.

Sherlock Holmes is the intellectual, logic bound, British character brought to the screen in the modern age. The essence of the books and the Rathbone portrayal has endured, and dare I say modernized just a touch.

There is of course CGI in the film. I don't think a film today can be made without it. But unlike most films where the CGI is meant to envision the fantastical, and endeavor that if unsuccessful ruins the film, here it is meant to add to the atmosphere. How else might we get to see London Bridge as it looked while being built?

In fact the set designs are spot on. The film captures the gritty, crowded, and lesser quality of life that the masses in Old London faces so many years ago. The washed out colors and general grays, add to the feel of the film, almost giving it a Black and White film feel, a touch of the classic. Which all sets the mood in a delightful way, so that you are absorbed into the world of the film and not jarred by it.

The plot also has to be commended. There are no obvious loopholes, no unexplainable events that mystically occur - due solely to the inability of a writer to think, a director to direct, and/or the interference of studios that just want to save a buck to maximize profit while providing the least enertainment possible. This film makes sense all the way through, and clues you in just when you need it to.

They even were able to fit in some humor and fights. Nothing so gratuitous as to be a Schwarzenegger film, but enough to justify the movie trailers that mislead action fans into seeing a thinking film. They even turned the tables and provided a mostly naked Downey for the females in the audience, while only hinting at the curves of the lovely Rachel McAdams.

So we must give some credit to the director Guy Ritchie. It's been quite some time since he had a film of the enjoyment of Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels. If he was looking for critical acceptance, and commercial success this film finally provides both.

The actors though are the real gems of this film. Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law mesh perfectly as the bickering, odd couple of partners that are inseperable on a case. The 2 banter and move like friends that have known each other too long. And they provide in their scenes the physical and emotional respect and admiration Holmes and Watson share.

Rachel McAdams really shines as Irene Adler. She brings as much wit as flair to the role. A woman that is instantly remarkable for her intellect as much as for her looks. McAdams strides the line as a powerful female character that never crosses into a bitchy or shrieking annoyance most mistakenly view as a powerful lead.

I really love one other thing. Professor Moriarty is not revealed, either by sight, name, or voice. He is an unknown that might, possibly, be revealed in the second film of what could become a series of films much like in the 1930's or James Bond. Which would also mean that Mycroft could also turn up at some point.

I recommend this film if you are tired of all the movies that go boom from start to end. There's nothing wrong with a good action film, but on occasion being able to engrosse the more mature and thinking parts of the mind never hurts either. This film provides that fix.

**Side note - if we must see Moriarty (which I think is best never shown fully if possible since there are liberties being taken to change aspects of the characters) who would be best? Some are whispering Brad Pitt which I think would be deadly to the series. Someone more refined, and possibly a bit older but dashing. Perhaps George Clooney (if he can do the accent). If not him then maybe John Simms.

List of 2009 movies - quality and money

Well it's that time of year again. The time when everybody creates a top 10 or best of list for 2009. And of course I will throw in my thoughts to the mix.

In terms of movies there isn't a lot to say. Most of the drivel from Hollywood is what we have been getting for quite some time now. Half thought out revisioned remakes of ideas done far better in the past. That goes for the revisioned comic books, movies, television shows and books that all hit the silver screen this year. But, against all odds there were a few movies that were actaully worth the money.

1. Watchmen - How could you not see this film? It was the rare exception of Hollywood taking a great story (from a comic graphic novel) and not revisioning it. The result was a beautiful and shocking twist on the concept of what is a superhero.

2. Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince - the kids are almost all grown up. The film continues the saga of Potter and friends, and it's still an interesting fresh movie several films into the series. The acting continues to improve and the story is modeled well after the books.

3. Angels and Demons - How can you go wrong with Tom Hanks and Ron Howard in a movie based on a Dan Brown book? It wasn't the DaVinci Code, but it sure beat the flood of films this year.

4. Sherlock Holmes - Yes I know it's not out yet. But I'm willing to bet on the acting ability of Robert Downey Jr. In addition his choices of films has been among the best in the industry. movie trailers can lie (and often do) but I'm willing to go with the talent and say this will make the cut.

And those are my top movies of 2009. But if you were wondering, here are the movies that made the most money (which has nothing to do with the quality of the film):

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen - a movie only matched in its stupidity by the amount of CGI onscereen at any time. This is proof that hype can overwhelm quality if you throw enough money at a marketing campaign. $402 million

Harry Potter and the Half-blood Prince - Number 2 on my list, it brought in $301 million. Proof that quality can make money too.

Up - Parents love to take kids to animated films. This one happened to be worth the time as well. $293 million

The Hangover - the surprise hit of the year. I never saw it, it seemed to sophmopric to me. But it brought in $277 million so there must be something to it. Likely to produce a sequel of some sort next year.

Star Trek - This revisioned make-over of the classic original television series was lauded long before it hit a single screen. But after seeing the film I found it more stilted than Shatner doing poetry. If this is the future of sci-fi I feel really bad for the next generation. $257 million. Revisionist sequel guaranteed.

A couple of other notable film revenues for the year:

Twillight: New Moon - just a question, has anyone over the age of 25 seen this film? No one I know over 25 has. $256 million and another film sure to come.

X-men Origins: Wolverine - Destroyed a great idea and character for big money. The only thing good about this film is the payday it made for Hollywood. But a sequel will happen to continue the pain. $179 million

Fast and Furious - Even Vin Diesel can't save a bad idea. Though it did make enough to guarantee Deisel will continue to star in a few more films. $155 million

GI Joe Rise of Cobra - Hype wins again. An insulting film that makes you want to see Wolverine again. Only exceeded in stupidity and boredom levels by Transformers. Sequel will happen even though anyone above 6 will cringe. $150 million

Angels & Demons - It made a respectable $133 million. Not bad for a sequel, though more was expected.

Terminator Salvation - Not the best continuation of the series. Christian Bale made a good John Connor, but the rest of the film was lazy and as bleak as the future it redises in. But the story ain't over yet. $125 million

Watchmen - Number 1 on my list only made $107 million. Perhaps it was just too much for audiences to take in. Especially compared to the low-brow low-quality films that topped the money list.

Tyler Perry's Madea Goes To Jail - Love or hate Perry 2 things are true. He is the biggest boost to getting Black actors in movies since Sidney Poitier and he makes money. What will Madea do next? $90 million

Michael Jackson's This Is It - The last tribute to the King of Pop. $72 million and it really isn't even a film.

Land of the Lost - People went to see this? $49 million

Notorious - The worst thing about this film is it probably made enough money to spawn equally bad expoitive cash grabs. $36 million and I have to wonder how doing anything (including sleeping) wasn't better than the film.

Pink Panther 2, Old Dogs, Halloween 2 (revisioned remake), SAW VI, Fame (revisioned remake) - I'm just amazed that none of these films, though all bad, did better than Notorious. I really hope that doesn't mean a trend of dead rapper movies.

Well that's my list, what do you think? Did I miss anything?

Movie Preview: Sherlock Holmes

As is wont of so many movies these days, the film Sherlock Holmes – starring Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law – is a physical take on an old theme. At least that is what the trailer is displaying at this moment.



I find it odd that one of the more classic and noted intellectuals of literary work has now become a brawling less thinking more ordinary hero in the hands of Guy Ritchie. I suppose that in this “revisioning” of the character is targeted to the Hollywood mentality that explosions beat thought. Or they just want to draw more younger fans that have never seen a movie based on this character let alone ever read a book about him.

My questions about the film all lie in the depiction the trailer presents and Guy Ritchie. They seem to be emphasizing the many notable flaws that Sherlock Holmes certainly has, and downplaying the deductive reasoning that made the character a master detective. Which is a real letdown.

Of course I have to mention that the accent by Robert Downey Jr. appears to be less than convincing, which is a surprise. In the past Sherlock has always had the distinctive British accent one would expect from an Englishman. But Downey is very American, and his accent betrays a weakness in the portrayal. I would hope it was just that the scenes selected were less important and not a complete picture of the accent employed. Not that many scenes in the movie trailer are speaking scenes.

Guy Ritchie tends to focus on the physical in his movies. He likes the ferocity of combat, and the motion of chaos as I have observed (which is hardly a complete vision of all his films). Thus I expect that much of what makes Holmes indelible will be lost due to no fault of the actors. How modern movie audiences will react is hard to say.

This is a period piece film. Yet the movie trailer flows more like a Dark Knight video clip than you would imagine. You can almost feel a Batmobile ready to pop out of a street corner.

I am comparing this a lot to the latest Batman revisioning. Not because I dislike the Christian Bale version (other than the Joker) but because it too generally ignores the deductive though and detective work (basically all the thinking of the character), replacing them with action. It works well, and audiences like it, but that does not mean that the character is being given the full depth it can have.

Thus I see Sherlock Holmes in a similar manner under the guidance of Ritchie. Bravado and flash, daring do vs. understanding of the situation. It can work well, and be a good film. But somehow I see Law and Downey being under used for such a film.

This is of course the first trailers for the film. This is a tease and as such we cannot be really sure what the actual film will comprise. But we can be sure there is a bit of titillation for the ladies, and action for the guys. Lots of on location scenes, and a bit of the classic British flare. But will there be a mind to the film, a piece of the soul found in the books? Maybe the next set of trailers will tell.

So until we can see more, I think this will be a decent film. I think it will do well in the box office. It will be worth the time spent in the theater, and for many that’s all that matter in the end.

Sherlock Holmes - the action movie

Sherlock Holmes is renown for may things. He is an addict, an intellectual, a musician, the foremost detective in the world, and by some accounts the inspiration of Batman. He is even the comic foil of his smarter brother Sigerson Holmes (Gene Wilder).

That's a lot for the creation of author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in over a century. This one character has been portrayed in numerous ways by over 71 actors in 201 films, and most have been widely accepted. Perhaps his best portrayals to date are some of the oldest, done by Basil Rathbone. But in modern times we have the ability to 'revision' classics and as they say in Hollywood "get it done the right way".

Thus Sherlock Holmes, friend of Scotland Yard is now an action hero. Yes, an action hero. Forget deductive reasoning, deep thought, and immense knowledge. This time Holmes is a womanizing brawny man. Move over Die Hard, a new era has begun.

I know the people of England are bitter and twisted.

The good news in all of this is that Robert Downey Jr. is the person playing the British master sleuth. The bad news is that the director is Guy Ritchie, and we will see Holmes naked and handcuffed to a bed. The film will be a departure of extreme from the novels and every other portrayal of the character on screen or in the theater.

Can Downey pull this off? I have to say that if there is any actor that could do this it has to be Downey can. I believe that he has the ability to make this departure work. in fact he has stated

"Past screen adaptations of Holmes stories "just never had the money to do it right," Downey said"

At the very least we all will have until Christmas to figure out if this 'revisioned' Sherlock Holmes is more Pinky or the Brain.