In a non-scientific observation, Arthur Conan Doyle's "Sherlock Holmes" appears to have a fairly shallow relationship with modern generations. He is at once a pop culture icon that everyone knows, for traits and catch phrases, and a caricature that few know well. Director Guy Ritchie and the honchos at Warner Bros. capitalized on this phenomenon and, for better or worse, tailored the detective to the preferences and trends of this generation.
An first glance a CGI-laden action romp with a fantasy overlay, Ritchie's revisionist "Sherlock Holmes" is at the midpoint of grandiose and overblown. This frenzy does not exactly correspond with the more subtle and intimate characters in Doyle's imagining. A trailer-worthy scene in which sidekick Dr. Watson jabs Holmes in the face summaries the discrepancy with the source material that will likely persuade newcomers but dissuade purists.
Moreover, the only elements maintained from the original series are the Victorian English setting and the basics of the characters. Beyond names and signature traits, plenty is either changed, or more commonly, exaggerated. Case in point: in the original stories Holmes is physically strong and savvy in the martial arts, but here one gets the impression that he is simply superhuman, diving into water from lethal heights and dodging bullets like taxmen.
Admittedly, movies should be assessed on their own merits and not by their precedents, and this form of objectiveness benefits Ritchie's "Holmes."
At times contrived, borrowing devices from recent adventure-mystery stories, more noticeably Ron Howard's "Angels and Demons," the plot is nonetheless absorbing. Some seemingly supernatural plot points are initially disappointing, considering that the lead character relies only on utmost logical reason, but one shouldn't be quick to jump to conclusions.
The film begins with an intriguing sequence that sees Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and Watson (Jude Law) racing to stop a certain Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong) from sacrificing a woman in a strange ritual of dark magic. Eventually Blackwood is apprehended by the inept Scotland Yard inspector Lestrade (Eddie Marsan) and is given a life sentence. Not long after Blackwood is executed and affirmed to be dead, the duo learns that he has allegedly risen from his grave, and of the beginnings of a wide-scale conspiracy.
Meanwhile, Watson is steadily preparing for family life with Mary Morstan (Kelly Reilly), of course interrupted by the indelible urge of following the case at hand, and Holmes struggles with a love interest of his own, Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams), a femme fatale with a different interest in Blackwood's schemes.
Holmes beams at the idea of a new case. While bulked up, a bit shorter, much messier and no longer sporting his deerstalker hat, he is still the intelligent pipe-smoking detective with an extraordinary knack for logical deduction. Robert Downey Jr. of the recent "Iron Man" series, one of today's best and most marketable actors, flawlessly delves into the upgraded role, in a performance that can even be labeled understated despite its physicality. His British accent does come with some mumbling but seems accurate as a whole.
The rest of the ensemble was largely chosen with care and the requisite that no actor is obviously upstaged by Downey. The gifted Jude Law delivers a very satisfying, multi-layered Dr. Watson, one of the most prolific sidekicks in history. Law is a times reminiscent of Vitali Solomin, who played Watson in the Russian "Holmes" outing of the early 80's (more on that later). Strong and Marsan suit their characters, the former effectively emanating Blackwood's quiet menace and the latter Lestrade's quiet incompetence. The weak link here is Rachael McAdams, who is decent as Adler but seldom lustrous, always smaller then her character.
After a series of critical and commercial flops, including the indescribably dire "Swept Away," Ritchie seems to be moving steadily back on track. His filmmaking styles have barely changed, but his judgment seems to have improved. Rapidity, flashiness and an accent on editing and post-production are still in full swing, but here they are at least beginning to work for the plot. The easily abused slow motion effect, for instance, is well-employed, such as when Holmes pauses to figure out his next moves during fights.
In a film trying to appeal to the senses, the sounds are not much less significant than the visuals. The dialogue is well-written in the Holmes tradition and well-suited to the characters, who deliver it convincingly. Less convincing is the soundtrack, which, while catchy and playful enough, is dominated with somewhat anachronistic string staccato. The film is nonetheless an interesting turn for Oscar-winning composer Hans Zimmer, who is talented but at times repetitive, relying on heavy, resounding music.
The Russian series of made-for-TV adaptations of the early 1980s, with Vasili Livanov as the sleuth, is a more traditional version of Sherlock Holmes but remains the best to date. Livanov was even made Officer under a British order for his portrayal. This "Holmes" is not nearly the worst of the bunch; on the contrary it is an offbeat re-imagining, even fresh, if comparing by the series and not concurrent films.
Towards the end of the picture there is a blatant set-up for a sequel (an increasing trend with presumed successes, Ã la "Batman Begins" and "Pirates of the Caribbean"), set to involve one of Holme's infamous foes. In fact, a sequel was probably in order as soon as Robert Downey Jr. signed on. Thankfully, this is the type of film for which a continuation wouldn't be entirely misplaced, not because the first outing is a broken promise, but because there is still much to realize. It would be a shame to prematurely stifle the story considering how comfortable the lead characters appear in their roles. But next time around, less action and more deduction will certainly do the detective good.
Read the full article
