13_pines (13_pines) wrote,

  • Mood:
  • Music:

"Watson, what have you done?"

After waiting six months for this movie to be released, I finally got to see Sherlock Holmes last night.  Because I've read nearly all of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's novels and short stories, my expectations for the film were pretty high and I was worried about being disappointed.  Well, I shouldn't have been so concerned because the movie was more than satisfactory.  Director Guy Ritchie was able to capture the spirit of Holmes while adding in some (okay, a lot) of his own signature action sequences.

Things I liked:
  1. The fact that Jude Law didn't play Dr. Watson like a bumbling idiot.  Because guess what?  He's not.  He's also not a complete sycophant who follows Holmes around like a puppy.  He's a respected doctor and a war hero and even a bit of a ladies' man.  So thanks, Jude, for portraying Watson as he was always meant to be portrayed.
  2. That even though Guy Ritchie/Robert Downey, Jr. created more of an action-hero Holmes, there was still an aspect of deductive reasoning and analysis in almost every scene.  Because that's what Sherlock Holmes does, and without this part of his personality, Sherlock Holmes just isn't Sherlock Holmes.  He looks at a situation, takes in the most minute details, and comes up with a solution to the mystery.  So I felt like it was an acceptable balance between physicality and intellect.  Yes, you need some action (otherwise you're not going to keep teenage boys' attention, at least not in the year 2009), but Ritchie thankfully realized there's no need to dispense with what makes Holmes Holmes.
  3. The appearance of many of the characters from the stories (even if they weren't introduced in exactly the same way) -- Mary Morstan (Watson's first wife), Mrs. Hudson (the landlady at 221B Baker Street), Inspector Lestrade, Irene Adler (who only appears in one story -- although she's mentioned in several -- but has a relatively large part in the movie), and Professor Moriarty (although we never get to see his face).
  4. All the little details that you would only notice if you'd actually read Conan Doyle's stories -- like how Holmes is a master of disguise; how Watson has a minor gambling problem; how Holmes plays the violin and gets a bit, well, crazy when he doesn't have a case to work on (I noticed the filmmakers conveniently left out his cocaine addiction, though.); how Watson walks with a limp and uses a cane because he was injured while he was in the army; and the list goes on.
I guess the only thing that bothered me was the fact that the storyline wasn't taken from any of the actual short stories or novels and the main villain, Lord Blackwood, doesn't exist in the literary Holmes universe.  But I will say Mark Strong did a fantastic job as Blackwood despite not being a "real" Holmes character.  There were a few other nit-picky things that annoyed me, but overall it was a solid film that captured the essence of Conan Doyle's characters while putting a more modern twist on the classic tales.

Fun Fact:  There is a line in the movie that is taken directly from one of the short stories (and believe me, I was completely ecstatic when I heard it).  Holmes says to Watson, "It makes a considerable difference to me, having someone with me on whom I can thoroughly rely."  It's from "The Boscombe Valley Mystery."
Tags: books, movies, rdj

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded