Rate Sherlock Holmes (2009)

[Krug]

So what did you think of Guy Ritchie's interpretation of the great detective?

 

[Crothian]

THe characters were fine, the story was a mess and just tried too much.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Action Sherlock does not work, they tried too hard to the effect that it just seemed jumbled. Felt they dumbed down the character with the action.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Action Sherlock does not work, they tried too hard to the effect that it just seemed jumbled. Felt they dumbed down the character with the action.

I disagree completely. I thought it worked just fine.

It wasn't a perfect movie, by any means. I thought it dragged in a few places, and while I enjoy convoluted plotlines, this one felt a bit convoluted in the wrong ways.

But I enjoyed the movie as a whole, enough to want the DVD, and I thought the performances--and yes, the portrayal of Holmes--were the high points.

 

[Goodsport]

I liked it.

The production values were very good (there's no doubting that it's set in late Victorian-era London), Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law did very well in their roles (this version's Sherlock Holmes was a bit more disheveled than past film versions and maybe even in the books, though this version's Dr. John Watson was more the former army surgeon from the books rather than the bumbler of past film versions), and Rachel McAdams as Irene Adler was absolutely stunning!

The story was pretty good and the immediate story arc was completed by film's end, though a few loose ends remained and it's obvious at the end that a sequel toward the "bigger picture" of the arc is implied (though whether said sequel will happen depends on this film's box office returns, I'm sure).

It certainly would've been worth the regular price of admission or even the discounted price of most early showings, but it was totally worth the price for me since I got to use the first of my two pre-paid movie passes I received at my work's Secret Santa party last week, so all I had to pay for today was my popcorn and drink.


-G

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Not the worst Holmes movie that I have ever seen (I reserve that for The Adventure of Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother (1975) directed and starring Gene Wilder), and a trifle better than Without a Clue - which is to say, it was still really, really bad. It was a step up from the treatment of Wild, Wild West, and had decent sets. Downey as Holmes annoyed the Hell out of me, but Jude Law was better as Watson than I expected. Both could have worked on their diction, and taken a little note of Victorian sensibilities.

I would give it a 2.5 out of the 10 above. But, I didn't have to pay for it, so I'll live. Plot was not so much convoluted as lost, but Doyle was guilty of that too, more than once. What I really did not like was the interaction between Holmes and Watson - it grated like sand in the gear box.

Brett remains the best Holmes, so far. If Jude Law had the diction a trifle closer he might be the best Watson, even though the movie itself is really not all that good. It did make me want to see a steampunk Sherlock movie sometime, though.

The Auld Grump, for that matter, I would like to see the Holmes & Russel series by Laurie R. King become a movie series....

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

I really want to like it. I think it will be successful enough to spawn a sequel and followups will easily be BETTER than this one was. I think the story was... okay. What I thought was an issue was the editing. I think the editing is responsible for the story itself seeming so jumbled and messy. Still, it was reasonably entertaining. I gave it a 7 and that seems to be the general reaction to it.

 

[stonegod]

Great chemistry, lush scenery, interesting interpretation, but ultimately just entertaining. Could have done more & better.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Downey as Holmes annoyed the Hell out of me, but Jude Law was better as Watson than I expected. Both could have worked on their diction, and taken a little note of Victorian sensibilities.
... What I really did not like was the interaction between Holmes and Watson - it grated like sand in the gear box.

Wow. I loved Downey as Holmes, and I loved the interaction between them. Thought those were some of the movie's highlights.

 

[catsclaw227]

I haven't seen it yet, though I am planning to see a matinee during the week this next week. I need surgery on my arm next Wednesday, so I will be out of commission for a while and want to get a holiday movie in before then.

Rachel McAdams as Irene Adler was absolutely stunning!

I love her. She is the ultimate girl-next-door beauty, but smart-sounding.

The story was pretty good and the immediate story arc was completed by film's end, though a few loose ends remained and it's obvious at the end that a sequel toward the "bigger picture" of the arc is implied (though whether said sequel will happen depends on this film's box office returns, I'm sure).

The box-office is showing good so far. And they are definitely going into this looking to build a franchise. A series like Pirates of the Caribbean or similar.

Downey as Holmes annoyed the Hell out of me, but Jude Law was better as Watson than I expected. Both could have worked on their diction, and taken a little note of Victorian sensibilities.

Ouch! I heard from two different groups of friends that they were great(!) together and I look forward to enjoying their chemistry for myself. Hmmmm.... I'll fill you in later after I go see it.

Brett remains the best Holmes, so far.

I have heard this from more than one person already. I need to see this Holmes.