Liked it
Why Sherlock Holmes Movie is One of The Worst Ever Movies?
This movie, in fact, starkly contrasts with my feelings about the original Sherlock Holmes. I would rather leave the theater than to stay and watch this again. Holmes and Watson astonished the audience with their immature behavior and did not demonstrate the well known intellect like Brett and Rathbone did.
In Sherlock Holmes movie, it was told that Dr. John Watson (Jude Law) was preparing for his married life, in contrast to that, Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey, Jr.) was left to face his uninspired future without the presence of his trusted party alongside him. Both Dr. Watson and Sherlock Holmes were then trapped into an extreme battle with the villainous Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong) who crawled out from the coffin coming back to London. Blackwood was said to use his mysterious dark powers to cheat death while undertaking his plan to rule the city.
Sherlock Holmes novels by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle are all about solving mysteries, which have remained in the public consciousness over decades. In Sherlock Holmes movie, however, Holmes was made into an adventure or action hero. You can see that Hollywood is marketing the movie into more action oriented, rather than as a MYSTERY to get the movie sold out. When the movie maker has fictionalized Holmes’ role to be extremely action oriented, his original character can be entirely buried. Now, I can’t imagine how Jude Law is going to get himself starring as Charles Darwin in 2010.
I’m not arguing about how Holmes has turned into an impressive fighter in Sherlock Holmes movie, but the only contradictory part I saw is that Holmes was made to be unprofessional, stout and appeared to be scruffy to the audience. The personality of Holmes that I read from the novels was quite opposite from the personality that was portrayed in Sherlock Holmes movie. For example, as heard in Sherlock Holmes movie, he used expressions such as dude, bitchin’, far out, or gnarly.
I love to read Sherlock Holmes novels, but this Sherlock Holmes trailer just seemed like a joke. It obviously shows the movie maker sacrificing the primary characters that Holmes has to make him just didn’t appear as Holmes. In fact, Holmes is skinny and wiry. In this movie, speaking of Irene Adler “played as Holmes’ love interest and was about 15 years younger than him”. Ugh, this was so wrong!
In the scene, you’ll hear the large French thug saying “Tu m’as manqué?” and you’ll see the subtitle showing as “Did you miss me?” Obviously, this is one of the commonly made mistakes. A native French speaker would say “Je t’ai manqué?” which means “Did I miss you?” literally but actually it carries idiomatic definition of “Did you miss me?”
In another scene, you’ll see both Dr. Watson and Holmes being ferried across the Thames for the first time. Examining the scene closely, in speaking of Watson taking off his jacket was just like a computer animated shot. This was crazy, huh?
The giant Ferris wheel was not in London in the last century, and according to Robert Downey Jr., he clarified that they shouldn’t have filmed a pivotal fight scene there. He admitted that several historical inaccuracies and mistakes have been crept into Sherlock Holmes movie.
There was a significant factual error. This was recognised when Sherlock Holmes was having dinner with Dr. Watson and his girl friend. At that moment, Dr. Watson was wearing a zipped up jacket. This was wrong because the zipper wasn’t invented until 1891.
In one of the scenes, you’ll see a London newspaper’s headline: Sherlock Holmes Aides Police. Obviously, there was one grammatical error. The correct word should be “Aids” but not “Aides”.
This movie, in fact, starkly contrasts with my feelings of what Sherlock Holmes is and I would rather not watch this movie again. Holmes and Watson astonished the audience with their immature behavior and did not demonstrate the well known intellect like Brett and Rathbone did.
You might also like my other movie review:
- Avatar’s black spot: “black lung” rating for promoting smoking
- Avatar: unveiling its stunning hidden messages
- The world will never be the same if you see through the eyes of Forest Gump
You can read more of my content at LiteSeek. Take care and have a good day!
38 Comments
I went to see this movie last week with a friend and we both hated it. It was such a disappointment. The violence seemed so unneccessary and there was so little of Sherlock Holmes’s character from the original stories there. A very good review.
Christine
I wanted to watch this movie but after reading this I better not. Sherlock Holmes is my hero and I can’t stand anyone ruining his original image. thanks for the review.
AS USAUAL GR88888888888888888888888
We saw it on Christmas and we were a bit disappointed as well. But I took it as an early look at them before they matured, they were really just silly little boys looking for adventure. I will have to watch it again when it comes to cable to catch all those errors. Nice post, my friend.
Chan,
This is an excellent review that will same me the trouble of watching this movie.
Blessings,
Chris
Great article, Chan! I’ve never seen the movie yet, but do plan to.
This is a great review, Chan. When I saw the preview for Sherlock Holmes, I didn’t think I would like it. Thanks to your great review, I don’t have to waste time seeing it.
Great job Chan, you caught a bunch of factual errors! Holmes was always fun to read because of his intellect not his brawn seems as if the movie goes off base from Holmes true character.
I think change intellectual as an adventure is not appropriate. We know Sherlock Holmes as detective not a fighter. Agree with you.
You seem to have nitpicked afew mistakes in the film, but have hardly made the case for it being one of the worst movies ever. Errors in historical context, idiomatic French miscues, and reinvigorating the characters for a modern audience hardly constitute unforgivable errors, like creating FX sequences before the script is finished (Transformer 2, I’m talking about you).
I thought that Ritchie actually did a good job of celeverly disguising a mystery film as an action film, by burying the tired old mystery conventions within a modern narrative style, but still presenting the recounting of how Blackwood would have accomplished his tricks in a way that fit with Ritchie’s own style (seen in Snatch for instance).
I think you might be misleading your readers into avoiding what is actually a fairly entertaining movie that gives people another take on Sherlock’s world. Hugh Laurie does a pretty good reinterpretation in House, for those not as bent on “action” and more “deduction”.
How horrible, why would anyone ever want to make another movie about Sherlock Holmes? Rathbonen is the only Sherlock. Never was before, never will be again.
I guess I have hesitated to go see it because I too love the Holmes stories. On the other hand, if I accept it for what it is, I think maybe I can have fun watching this movie when it comes out on DVD.
Inna
Thank you for the information, Chan. I see why you don’t like the movie, and those will be the same reasons that will prevent me from
watching that movie. Great post!
Sincerely,
Hugo
Haven’t seen this movie. I think I’ll wait for the DVD to come out and see what’s the buzz about this movie.
Chan, thank you so much, for helping me save some bucks on theater tickets..LOL, you have here a very in-depth review.
yes waiting for your new review…
Nice review Chan.
good one Chan..job well done….excellent review.
Chan, sorry, I had to come back to post my comment. Seems it didn’t post yesterday.
I have to agree with you that Sherlock Holmes is known for a certain intellect and decorum. Less than would not be in keeping with the image. I watched and read his books to solve the crimes along with him and marveled at his thought process. I do not want that marred.
Excellent review my friend. Well, what could I say…The producers might be eyeing for sheer luck to top the chart and reap profits. Sherlock Holmes is far from home.
Your review had me LMAO! No, there was nothing wrong with it. It’s spot on. I’m laughing because I am not a Sherlock Holmes fan – what I mean is that other than knowing SH was a pipe smoking detective in Victorian London with a sidekick named Watson, I am totally unfamiliar with the character. Yet my criticisms of the movie are more or less in line with someone who appears to be a fan and very familiar with the series.
I came out of that theater scratching my head trying to figure out why what should have been a good and interesting movie. I had no preconceived idea of SH and I was aware of it being a re imagining of the series going in. I have no idea how SH is, if he is married or single, if he has dark or light hair or is bald, how he behaves, what his relationship is with Watson or if Irene Adler was ever a character in the series. For all I knew, SH was a quirky mad scientist with a repressed homosexual crush on Watson in the series. I liked Dan Brown’s books and thought National Treasure was fun. I could have been all into this story. However, I agree with all your points, in my own way. I have come down to the fault being in the direction. It was boring. I had no interest in the characters. There was no development. Irene Adler was too tawdry even for this Holmes. This made Transformers look like it had character development.
Oddly enough I am vaguely familiar with the concept of SH’s nemesis being called “Moriarity” which added to my annoyance as this was OBVIOUSLY a set up for a sequel (with another director I hope).
Download and watch the new movie Sherlock Holmes http://blog-movie.com/Sherlock-Holmes.html
I’m sorry, but your review completely misses the mark! The Sherlock Holmes from this most recent movie is MORE consistent with the character from the original short stories. In those stories Holmes is specifically said to abuse drugs and alcohol on a regular basis, can beat any man in fisticuffs and lives in an unorganized mess. These character traits were glossed over slightly in the stories and other movies because of their potentially shocking nature and the cultural context of the time of their production. I believe this is much more the Holmes’ that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle would have written if his cultural norms would have been as relaxed as today’s are.
As for the continuity issues, there are many of those no matter what movie you see. The important part is always the STORY, which so often gets lost in an action based movie. Here, it was very much a driving factor.
While the movie was far from perfect and lacked in some places, it is still an above average offering. The Holmes character only offends those that have not read between the lines of the story and truly looked at the intention of the original offering.
I’m sorry, but I must respectfully disagree with your review.
http://cinemaroll.com/cinemarolling/sherlock-holmes-2009/
interesting, I’ve not seen it yet, seems a shame if it drifts away into action hero territory
Upnorth has it spot on, I am a huge fan of the original short stories and I absolutely loved this movie. I have also seen the ealier movies and they simply don\’t compare to this one
Upnorth has it spot on, I am a huge fan of the original short stories and I absolutely loved this movie. I have also seen the ealier movies and they simply don\\\’t compare to this one
Why Sherlock Holmes Movie is One of The Worst Ever Movies? Because your reasoning is very fault. Elementary, my dear “CHAN LEE PENG”. Your elementary knowledge of Holmes, maybe, will tell you that this phrase was never actually said by the character of Holmes, since it does not appear in any of the sixty Holmes stories written by Conan Doyle. Sherlock Holmes and The Hound of Baskervilles- read it first and then tell me about action hero….most of the people here think that -TV Holmes- or- old movies Holmes- is more CANON than Doyle novels and the stories in The Strand Magazine. They get a a little overprotecting of other views of Holmes- OLD pristine glamouraized views- not the Doyle, Holmes, that readers lined up outside the magazine offices, waiting to get the next installment from August 1901 to April 1902. You also bashed the Lord of the ring trilogy because detour greatly, from the Ralph Bakshi animation of the same books?
I’m with Steve and upnorthreviewer on this one; Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes is nowhere near “One of The Worst Ever Movies,” in my opinion. It may have some goofs and factual errors, but one would be hard-pressed to find any movie in which these are completely absent, and I hardly think the mistakes are enough to push Sherlock Holmes into the territory of “Worst Ever Movies.” About a third of the way through your review, I wondered if we had watched the same film; nowhere do I remember hearing any character using “expressions such as dude, bitchin’, far out, or gnarly”…
In any case, this rendition of Sherlock Holmes may not be in line with previous film adaptations (although, as upnorthreviewer stated, it may actually be more true to the original short stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle), but it was definitely very entertaining and full of mystery! Robert Downey Jr.’s portrayal of Sherlock Holmes may not have been the strait-laced, sober character you were expecting to see, but it sounds like you are too hung up on his physical appearance because I thought he was certainly much more than “unprofessional, stout” and “scruffy”. This Sherlock Holmes still displayed obvious intellectual brilliance and the thoughtful attention to detail that would be expected of such a detective–and all of these traits were displayed even in the fights scenes that you seem to consider as useless fodder to draw audiences.
I admit, before I saw this film I was extremely skeptical about the very same points you raise at the beginning of your review, but after actually watching Sherlock Holmes I think that it was successful in including the action-adventure elements without compromising the characters’ genius or taking away from the mystery that drove the story. I was very interested in finding out how Holmes would solve the Blackwood case, and felt satisfied when he revealed all of his deductions at the end of the film. All in all, I thought the movie was clever, accessible and entertaining enough to overlook its errors and generic Hollywood one-liners. It wasn’t perfect, but it was definitely quite good. (And I will be watching its sequel!)
Are you kidding? Downey does not use expressions such as dude, bitchin’, far out, or gnarly in the film.
There’s a website called “The Spoof”, and the story about Holmes saying things like “dude”, “bitchin’” “far out” or “gnarly” comes form a SPOOF article there. You can read it here:
http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s4i64375
If you read this (somewhere second-hand?) on the web and based your review on it, how are we to trust anything else you post?
I understand fans of Sir Arthur\’s stories expecting a certain style in a Holmes movie. I have not read more than a few excerpts from the stories in the past. I saw the trailer, and thought \”hey that looks like it\’d be fun\” fun being the key word, not expecting classical mystery theatre. I saw the movie xmas night, loved it, saw it again 4 more times over the following weeks, with different friends, all who love it. I\’m now reading the stories, and can clearly see the interpretation of the characters that was chosen by the actors, down to small traits. I\’m a huge fan of old hollywood, Rathbone and others, Sherlock is the most portrayed character on stage and screen. Most have been impersonations of Rathbone. The new movie was a welcome new style, as far as the \”adventure\” aspect, maybe a little big at times but it\’s 2010, and mass audiences expect to be wowed. Perhaps this movie will inspire youth to discover the original stories, it has for me and I\’m not a youth. If you\’re skeptical wait for the DVD, but don\’t write it off as garbage til you see it. To each his own.
Oh and if you hate this Sherlock Holmes movie, I can’t wait to hear review of the next one with Sacha Baron Cohen and Will Ferrel. I’m sure they will definitely stay close to the original stories. haha.
This is quite a thread already. I haven’t seen the movie yet.
Get a life loser. The Downey Jr. web article IS A SPOOF. Did you actually see the movie or are you basing your review on the trailer?
The biggest continuity flaw I spotted was, how did Professor Moriarty get the canister that came from the machine?
He chases Irene Adler who originally removes them from the machine, then Lord Blackwood gets them from her, then Holmes gets them from him and sets the down….and then???
In a flash back at the end it shows the hand of Moriarty putting them in his bag. Why would Holmes leave them on the bridge? Did the bird take them? But the flash back makes it seem as if he got them in the sewer.
In case you didn’t know, and since nobody else has mentioned it, I shall educate you.
The correct spelling in the English language today is “aids.” However, in the Old English language, as it would have been during the movie’s time period, the word is spelled “aides.”
I also should point out that while Irene is supposed to be 15 years younger than Holmes, at the time that was perfectly acceptable. Most often girls were married by the time they were 15 or slightly older. It may be disturbing now, but at the time, it was very normal.
I personally love this movie and would suggest people go see it, they will be surprised at how much more accurately Guy Ritchie portrays Holmes and Watson in relation to the original characters than the performances of Brett and Rathbone portraying the dynamic duo.
I saw the movie, knowing very little about Sherlock Holmes, I’m not talking from any point of view that could classify me as a “fan”, and I deeply enjoyed the movie. I can see how the slightly imperfect french words and the zipper could be considered flaws, but it’s another thing entirely to say that those tiny flaws could destroy an entire movie, and then to say they made it the worst movie of all time is completely moronic, there are far worse movies that are in existence.
It seems most of the critique you had to offer is Sherlock’s contrast between his portrayal in this movie, and some other portrayal in the original books, or some other movie, I don’t know, but he as a character still managed to prove himself to be a detective, to be intelligent, have great attention to detail, and as a detective I would expect some ability to defend himself. I saw it twice, I enjoyed the wit, I didn’t see any “immaturity”, except for maybe Sherlock’s hiring of a gypsy to give a false foretelling of Watson’s future, which I found quite funny.
There was absolutely no “dude” or “gnarly” in the whole movie, and seeing your veritable onslaught of retarded cohorts agreeing with you and saying things to the effect of “thank you for giving me good cause to stay away from this movie,” makes me think you’re actually causing a problem, making it so that these people get the wrong impression of the movie, never see it, and then probably talk about it though, bringing up your arguments, which they never even checked for validity.
You are a wannabe insufferable arrogant snob(not a real one), and not at all good at it. Can’t appreciate an actors work. Just a painfully pathetic nasty ignorant jerk…. however, you are entitled to be that as we do live in a democracy. Pitty you must inflict your opinions on others who could care less what U think.
The movie takes place in 1891, just so you know. The zipper would have existed.
I completely disagree with this review. Upnorth and all those who agree with them are quite right.
1. They don’t fight on a ferris wheel but a bridge
2. The 1st sherlock book describes Sherlock as a good boxer
3. Aids not Aides??? Purlease. Picky or what, I’d never care about that if I just went in to enjoy a film
4. The books o sometimes describe Holmes as unheygenic
5. The banter between Holmes and Watson makes the relationship amazing
6. The TV and old film versions were less close to the books that this!!! Especially the bumbling 80 year old Watson.
7. I really enjoyed this film. Its fast fun and the characters are amazing
And finally, Andrew Lowe, nice one on the zipper thing
oh and nice one Ellen Rogers Lol.