Sherlock Holmes Movie

[Daojia]

I haven't read any Holmes stories but I'm 99% certain it's original

Izawwlgood was being sarcastic, I think. If you've ever seen an interview with the people who created House, the first thing they mention is how much of an influence Sherlock Holmes was. Wikipedia says that in the middle of the series, Wilson messes with House's team's heads by creating an imaginary girlfriend of House named Irene Addler.

Not to mention the drug dependency, the antisocial behaviour, the bloodyminded attentiveness to small details, the cane, their shared home-addresses, and that the man that shot House was called Moriarty!

[Izawwlgood]

I was being sarcastic about the House thing, but I was curious about the films originality, and am under the impression Zohar is confident that it was an original ACD Holmes story.

The joke about House was that House is in fact, based on Holmes. To say there are parallels is an understatement.
(And I think it was particularly funny, because the Avatar thread's biggest complaint, that I've been arguing against, is that Avatar was an unoriginal film...)

[Zohar]

I was replying to what Izawwlgood is referring to - whether the movie's plot is one of the original stories written by ACD. And I wrote I'm fairly certain it is original, because of certain plot elements. Though after wiki'ing for a bit, it seems I'm wrong (in my reasons for thinking it's original):

Spoiler:

I was referring to the usage of radio waves, then I saw the radio was invented sometime around 1830, which is before ACD was born, so it's possible he wrote a story about that.

[ameretrifle]

I haven't seen it yet, but from what I've read in this thread and on Wikipedia-- no. Not based directly on one of ACD's stories. Obviously characters are borrowed, the occasional minor detail, but the plot itself is assuredly not Doyle's, unless I have entirely lost my mind. Not that there's anything wrong with that; it's true to the spirit in several ways, and true to established fanon in others. Apparently they haven't made Watson a complete idiot? For that alone I am prepared to forgive them nearly anything. Even though I am less than satisfied with the latest trend of "modernizing" stories purely by adding more sex and violence... as long as it's actually fun, that's all right. Well, we'll see.

Possibly of interest to those who wish to compare: Sherlockian.net. Lots of info, and links to all the stories. Holmes is never actually shirtless, and Irene Adler vanishes into Europe with her new husband directly at the end of "A Scandal in Bohemia". But you do have the KKK, and the Mormons, and Mrs. Hudson getting knocked up. ;D (oh god, for that joke, i'm officially a sherlockian now, aren't i? if the username hadn't damned me already.)

[Box Boy]

Looks good, no major complaints from me so far. The story being original is a relief to mer, as I was afraid I would know the ending from as soon as the mystery was presented (I've read a few of the books, and have enough Sherlockian acquaintances to have had the rest spoiled)
so long as it's in the same spirit of the books, and Watson isn't borderline mentally challenged, I'm going to be happy.

[Forum Viking]

Oi! Expert opinion here (ish), since I read the Complete Sherlock Holmes (Volumes one... and two! [of two]) at some point in junior high. It is not a ACD plot, in any way, shape, or form. Also, the series "first appeared in publication in 1888."

K so for the film: if you like witty banter and such, it abounds in profusion. And if you're into Da Vinci Code-esque secret societies trying to take over the world, well, there's that too. The plot is basic stuff: the bad guy gets away, they track him down, find some clues, banter wittily, stop the plot in the nick of time. It's basically Shanghai Knights for a slightly older audience. If you're going to make a Holmes movie, I think you really need to stick to a more 'personal' who-dunnit-y type mystery, like Arthur Cabon Doyle's favorite (according to Wikipedia) The Adventure of the Speckled Band or even one of the novels (Hound of Baskervilles, etc.) The big international James Bond-y stuff really doesn't fly, in my opinion, not even in the serials. It's really always been a collection of mysteries; Wikipedia explains Moriarty as so:

Doyle's original motive in creating Moriarty was evidently his intention to kill Holmes off. "The Final Problem" was intended to be exactly what its title says; Doyle sought to sweeten the pill by letting Holmes go in a blaze of glory, having rid the world of a criminal so powerful and dangerous any further task would be trivial in comparison (as Holmes says in the story itself). Moriarty only appeared in one book because, quite simply, having him constantly escape would discredit Holmes, and would be less satisfying. The Valley of Fear changes this.
Eventually, public pressure forced Doyle to bring Holmes back.

The later books mention the character a bit more, but you can't make years of barely interconnected mysteries into one film, unless the real intent here is to create a Steampunk James Bond franchise.

EDIT:

Spoiler:

At least the magic wasn't real, but who really expected it to be?

[Oort]

I noticed that

Spoiler:

Holmes makes reference to going "down the rabbit hole." Would this have been accurate? Sherlock holmes appeared in print not too long after Alice in Wonderland.

[Zohar]

The reference preceded this by more than 20 years, so it's possible.

[lulzfish]

I noticed that

Spoiler:

Holmes makes reference to going "down the rabbit hole." Would this have been accurate? Sherlock holmes appeared in print not too long after Alice in Wonderland.

Spoiler:

No, he was referring to The Matrix, obviously.

But I heard it as "rat hole", and immediately thought I misheard it.

[Admiral Valdemar]

I noticed that

Spoiler:

Holmes makes reference to going "down the rabbit hole." Would this have been accurate? Sherlock holmes appeared in print not too long after Alice in Wonderland.

Spoiler:

No, he was referring to The Matrix, obviously.

But I heard it as "rat hole", and immediately thought I misheard it.

Spoiler:

This also foreshadows his other similarity with House: the drug addiction.

[Sir_Elderberry]

Spoiler:

Or his other similarity with Lewis Carroll.

[aleflamedyud]

I quite liked it. I thought that this film did for Sherlock Holmes what the Dark Knight Trilogy has been doing for Batman.

[Spacemilk]

I noticed that

Spoiler:

Holmes makes reference to going "down the rabbit hole." Would this have been accurate? Sherlock holmes appeared in print not too long after Alice in Wonderland.

It's funny you say this. My sister had exactly the same criticism immediately after the movie finished. (by the way, I don't think this needs to be spoiled, as it does not reveal anything in the plot - so I am not going to)

Since I couldn't remember the publishing dates of Alice in Wonderland and Sherlock at the time, my argument was that his comment was something like "I went down the rabbit hole, and my little tail got dirty/singed." So it may be that he wasn't pretending to be like Alice, he really was simply using the analogy to a rabbit hole, since rabbit holes are twisty confusing little things. But it does make sense that if Alice in Wonderland had been published, he would have been referring to that.

Quite honestly though, it does make more sense as a Wonderland reference, I was simply trying to defend what I thought may have been a mistake, at the time. However, since Alice in Wonderland was very popular when it was initally published in 1865, and the movie was set in 1891, there actually is no need for my explanation and we can go with the more coherent explanation that it is a direct reference.

[You, sir, name?]

This is appalling, horrible and wrong. And I imagine Jeremy Brett is turning over in his grave.

[Forum Viking]

Hey! Wikipedia says, and somebody quoted it, that the movie is set in 1891, but didn't at some point Lord Hardwood (fine, Darkwood) say that

Spoiler:

they were going to take over America because the Americans were too weak & busy with the Civil War to properly fight back (battlehardened, fully mobilized armies on both sides notwithstanding)? So it must be set in 1861-1865? EDIT: Well, maybe he meant the Civil War weakened the Us' defenses, but still, 30 years later is kind of pushing the limits of "striking while the iron is hot."

[headprogrammingczar]

Bear in mind, the reconstruction of the south took a hell of a long time and lots of man-power.

[Sprocket]

I noticed that

Spoiler:

Holmes makes reference to going "down the rabbit hole." Would this have been accurate? Sherlock holmes appeared in print not too long after Alice in Wonderland.

Spoiler:

No, he was referring to The Matrix, obviously.

But I heard it as "rat hole", and immediately thought I misheard it.

LOL! Overall I really enjoyed it, but you know it had that whole era clothing thing going on, and it was directed by Guy Ritchie, so yeah, I was going to like it. I was afraid the plot was going to annoy me as I watched it, but it didn't. It was a good adventure, and good sit back and relax and don't let anything bother you, just have fun, stuff.

[Sir_Elderberry]

Bear in mind, the reconstruction of the south took a hell of a long time and lots of man-power.

And one of the reasons the CSA lost is because they didn't get the foreign aid from Britain that they expected. Could be that trouble could be stirred up again, especially considering how rough Reconstruction was.

Spoiler:

Of course, Blackwood is a power-hungry egomaniac, and a bad guy. I hear that sometimes those people lie, like he was already doing to his followers. For all we know he was going to stop with Britain and kill off anyone he ever told otherwise.

[cephalopod9]

Spoiler:

At least the magic wasn't real, but who really expected it to be?

You have higher expectations of Hollywood than I do.

Spoiler:

The trailers kind of made me expect something akin to League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. I can't think of any instances of out and out occult themes in the stories. Tho' I can think of an instance where extramarital boat rides were considered a little too scandalous for publication.

I was being sarcastic about the House thing, but I was curious about the films originality, and am under the impression Zohar is confident that it was an original ACD Holmes story.

The joke about House was that House is in fact, based on Holmes. To say there are parallels is an understatement.
(And I think it was particularly funny, because the Avatar thread's biggest complaint, that I've been arguing against, is that Avatar was an unoriginal film...)

Weirdly tho', it looks to me like they picked up on themes expanded by House

Spoiler:

The sort of tension between Watson and Holmes, I don't remember it making much of an appearance in the stories. That whole unshaved, messy look, granted, the original illustrations aren't exactly true to the stories either... Not that those things are bad, just seem sort of modern developments

Was there a dog in the original stories? I don't remember them having a dog, but I haven't read all of them.
I actually like a lot of the fighting scenes.

Spoiler:

Things did get sort of over indulgent, but for the most part it was pretty down to earth, and realistic. For a movie with extended CG effects, I mean.

[Mega D]

Was there a dog in the original stories? I don't remember them having a dog, but I haven't read all of them.

There was a dog that appeared once or twice. I'm pretty sure it belonged to Mrs. Hudson (the landlady), though. Holmes did once test something he expected to be poisonous on it, but the dog was already dying and he was euthanizing it.

[cypherspace]

Reiterating: This is not an Arthur Conan Doyle story. Hell, it's barely a Sherlock Holmes story. But that's almost why it's fun - it's doing the same thing that so many comic books have and totally reinventing the character, keeping only the essential details the same.

I enjoyed it. It's funny, quite inventive and creates what I quite like as an alternative Sherlock Holmes character. And I say that as a massive fan of the original stories - in fact I might go and read my complete collection again now...

PS: I think the above comment is on the money - the only other dog I can remember was the Hound Of The Baskervilles.

[ameretrifle]

I... am slightly staggered that I know this offhand, but in A Study in Scarlet, Watson states that he "keeps a bull-pup". This dog is never mentioned again, leading to speculation that this was in fact a metaphor at the time for having a bad temper. Additionally, (and thank god I had to look this up, even if I am dismayed that I knew exactly how to find it), Mrs. Hudson did indeed have an elderly terrier, in the same story. As it was sickly and needed euthanasia, Holmes used it as a guinea pig to prove that a certain capsule was poison (the first attempt, incidentally, failed-- it was the second that killed the dog within seconds). Short answer, no dog, no. ^^

[OOPMan]

I watched this on the weekend with my fiance. We were pleasantly surprised as we really weren't expecting much thanks to the rather lame trailers that we'd seen. The film itself delivered a very cool, almost steampunkish action-adventure experience that was just plain fun to watch.

The visuals were great, the music worked well and the overall plot moved quickly and never got dull.

And, most amazingly of all. Jude Law managed to do something other than pretend to be a mannequin.

Definitely worth a watch if you want something fun.

[Felstaff]

I re-read A Study in Scarlet after watching this, and it's really interesting to approach the story from a new angle. The story seems much more exciting with the Downey Jr. interpretation of Holmes, as well as Watson and Lestrade (who I think was casted perfectly). I liked the film because Watson is not the bumbling sidekick that he was portrayed as in all the "pipe & deerstalker" Sherlock Holmes adventures of the 1950s, but the exemplary intelligent medical professional foil that I guess he was supposed to be.

I guess the parallels stop there, as A Study in Scarlet is real Young Sherlock Holmes; excitable and devoted to his work. Downey Jr. is the more grizzled Sherlock; weary, wary and drug-addled, but still has his sharp mind. When I get round to reading the latter adventures, I think the characterisation will suit Holmes a lot more.

[Forum Viking]

Actually, yes. The Downey Edition of Holmes was pretty well-done I'd say, as was Watson. Just the plot was unimaginative, or too imaginative, or...

[cephalopod9]

I re-read A Study in Scarlet after watching this, and it's really interesting to approach the story from a new angle. The story seems much more exciting with the Downey Jr. interpretation of Holmes, as well as Watson and Lestrade (who I think was casted perfectly). I liked the film because Watson is not the bumbling sidekick that he was portrayed as in all the "pipe & deerstalker" Sherlock Holmes adventures of the 1950s, but the exemplary intelligent medical professional foil that I guess he was supposed to be.

That was a nice reversal of a trend

I... am slightly staggered that I know this offhand, but in A Study in Scarlet, Watson states that he "keeps a bull-pup". This dog is never mentioned again, leading to speculation that this was in fact a metaphor at the time for having a bad temper. Additionally, (and thank god I had to look this up, even if I am dismayed that I knew exactly how to find it), Mrs. Hudson did indeed have an elderly terrier, in the same story. As it was sickly and needed euthanasia, Holmes used it as a guinea pig to prove that a certain capsule was poison (the first attempt, incidentally, failed-- it was the second that killed the dog within seconds). Short answer, no dog, no. ^^

I remember that now that you mention it.
I think they can get away with drifting a bit from the source material, since the original stories were supposed to be Watson's notes, and not very in depth. I kind of liked the dog.

[podbaydoor]

So, has anyone seen Game of Shadows?

I think there's some parallel with Downey's other franchise, Iron Man 2 (though Iron Man 2 is overall a better movie than Game of Shadows). It feels like the writers/directors/whoever took what everybody liked about the first films, cranked those things up to 11, and then forgot to put in all the parts that made *those* parts stick together. Here in Game of Shadows, that means more fights, more choppy slow-mo (I wish Guy Ritchie would just film a straight action scene already), more explosions, more Holmes being eccentric. Oddly, it also means the subtext between Holmes and Watson gets even more flirtatious. The movie is practically writing its own fanfiction.

My favorite character is actually Claude Ravache, the French anarchist cell leader. He gets about five minutes and an ignominious ending, but Thierry Neuvic makes those five minutes darn compelling. I kind of would have preferred him to star in the movie.

Generally speaking, Game of Shadows makes a pretty entertaining evening, and I had a good time with it. I liked that they gave Mary Morstan (Watson's fiancée-turned-wife) ever so slightly more to do, and no matter what, the chemistry between Downey and Jude Law is forever entertaining to witness. But it all falls flat compared to the first movie, and I wouldn't watch it more than once.

[The EGE]

Very much agreed. I felt it was trying too hard to be an action movie, while the first one wasn't embarrassed to be a detective movie. A third of this movie was them running from Moriarty's assassins before they were even trying to stop him.

[podbaydoor]

I wish they'd shown some of the detecting that Holmes did that resulted in the office full of strings and maps. Actually, I quite liked the train sequence - not the least because Mary got to have a badass moment there - but they could have left it at the train sequence for their action quota. The scene in the woods was just gratuitous.

Oh, by the way. Stephen Fry. As Sherlock Holmes's brother. *swoon* That there's a real plummy British accent.

[Izawwlgood]

I dug it, but agree that it was more an action film than a detective film. I also find it rather annoying that the detective sequences really amount to Holmes having flashbacks during an explanation much later on; I think effective detective-ing is something that the audience might also be able to piece together.

That said, the close quarters combat action sequences were fantastic. The humor was pretty good. It was a fairly entertaining film.

[setzer777]

I haven't seen the sequel, but in a way you could say it's faithful: in the original Moriarty story we don't actually see Holmes do any investigating of Moriarty, he's just already found the evidence and is running from assassins. Not that it was a particularly good story (Moriarty's genius comes across as an informed attribute).

[cephalopod9]

Oh, by the way. Stephen Fry. As Sherlock Holmes's brother. *swoon* That there's a real plummy British accent.

Why is this not more obvious from the promos??

I haven't seen it, but overall, it's seeming like one of the times that a film takes on an existing franchise without trying very hard to understand it. Did they take on an existing story/mystery this time?

[podbaydoor]

Yes and no. The rough storyline is Moriarty & Reichenbach Falls (with a super awesome badass Sebastian Moran), but it kind of does its own thing with the plot elements. Way more action scenes, obviously. And a smart Watson.

Also, Holmes and Watson publicly waltz together at a ball. Did I mention that this movie writes its own fanfiction? I realize that I was watching with my perverted fandom slash goggles on, but the byplay between RDJ and Jude Law was possibly the gayest thing I've ever seen without actually stating it's gay. I mean, basically the entire movie is about Holmes trying to save Watson. I'm not even exaggerating here.

I mean, Stephen Fry gets naked in this movie. That's practically a commandment, there.

[Izawwlgood]

Out of curiosity, can someone explain to me how they;

Spoiler:

used the horticulture book to crack Moriarty bank vault and legally steal from him? I was surprised to see Scotland yard effectively robbing someone, unless I misinterpreted what was going on there.

[podbaydoor]

Spoiler:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_cipher
That's how they crack the red book.

I think the implication was that Moriarty got his wealth through illegal means - apparently in the Doyle books he was the head of a bunch of criminal enterprises. That allows Scotland Yard to seize the wealth as evidence or whatever.

[Izawwlgood]

Spoiler:

I thought the mastermind part of it all was that he managed to gain ownership of those companies, and wealth, via sufficiently covert and sneaky means?

[big boss]

Spoiler:

I thought the mastermind part of it all was that he managed to gain ownership of those companies, and wealth, via sufficiently covert and sneaky means?

Spoiler:

Yea, he killed off or swindled the owners of companies so he could put himself in charge

[Izawwlgood]

Spoiler:

Then why didn't they arrest him at the summit, instead of confiscating his stuff? Because they weren't in England?

[infernovia]

The director needs to add tension for the events, I had to fight off sleep through the middle section. You can't keep letting the viewer's brain go on standby each time the action develops, though the end was pretty good.

[podbaydoor]

I went into the movie knowing I could switch my brain off and just go along for the fangirl-y ride. Although, as silly as the movie got in the middle,

Spoiler:

the moment where Watson steps on the balcony, meets Holmes's eyes, and Holmes hurls himself off the edge, destroys me every time. It was very understated compared to all the overblown proceedings in the rest of the movie, and I thought they played that superbly. No cheesy "Nooooooo"s or anything.

@Izawwlgood,

Spoiler:

I think it's because there wasn't enough time. Holmes mailed the red book to Mary and had to immediately leave for Switzerland to stop the assassination. Mary and Lestrade were decoding the book and confiscating the wealth at the same time that Holmes and Watson were at the summit.

Current fanon theory is that Holmes did intend to arrest or somehow incapacitate Moriarty in some way, not kill him. But after Moriarty made his threat of finding creative ways to dispose of Watson and Mary, Holmes realized that he couldn't leave Moriarty alive, otherwise Watson would be forever in danger. That's when Holmes decided to kill him.