Sherlock Holmes (The Movie)

Despite myself, I seem to find that I am enjoying Robert Downey Jr.’s recent work. Sherlock Holmes is a good example.

Don’t get me wrong, the film is definitely outside the Conan-Doyle canon, but it’s not so far out as to be unrecognizable, and I thought that the premise was sound. If you’re a Holmes purist, skip it, because you will be annoyed beyond the telling of it. If you’re a bit more tolerant of a diversion, you’ll probably conclude that Jude Law is too young for a strict interpretation of Dr. Watson, and not unreasonably, but he’s perfect for the way that the character is written in the film. Any actress playing Irene Adler would have a lot to live up to, and Rachel McAdams is sufficient, if not brilliant, in the role. I do wish we’d seen more of Moriarty, but the production company is obviously saving him up for a sequel. In fact, the Moriarty plotline is decidedly secondary, and I wish we’d gotten a little bit more of it.

Admittedly, I’m biased, as I am an unabashed fan of steampunk and there’s a good taste of it in the film. But the action sequences are excellent, the plot moves at a good pace, and the characters are engaging. If only League of Extraordinary Gentlemen had been half as good, it wouldn’t have sucked. Guy Ritchie’s directing style is distinctive, and the parallels to Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels were understated, but not unnoticed. For example, casting; I’m sure I’ve seen the French-speaking thug in at least one other Guy Ritchie film—and he was a great supporting character in this one.

This film is unlikely to win awards, and has the distinct disadvantage of direct competition from Dances with Aliens Avatar. Unlike the competition, it has more than special effects to hold the viewer’s interest.

Leave a Reply