Last night
esrblog and I went with friends to see the latest Sherlock Holmes movie, "Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows" starring Robert Downey, Jr. as the great sleuth.
The movie had a lot of what made the first Sherlock Holmes film a lot of fun: good period color (don't confuse that with meticulous authenticity, however) and great acting, especially from Downey, Jude Law as Dr. Watson, Kelly Reilly as Watson's bride, Mary, and Noomi Rapace, as Madam Simza, a gypsy fortune teller who managed to become entangled with the two. Rachel McAdams as Irene Adler makes some brief appearances at the beginning of the movie and then disappears, with suggestions that she has been permanently disposed of.
Unfortunately, the overall story was even weaker this time around. There were some great scenes, and some marvellous plot contrivances, but they are connected to each other by rather dull, all-dialogue scenes that are boring by virtue of their predictability (even when they are meant to contain plot clues). There were also increasing amounts of minor, but distracting, anachronisms, the most conspicuous of which turn up in the dialogue ("having a relationship"; "no pressure!") A large part of the problem with the script is that it has to deal with the difficulties in introducing Professor Moriarty into the movie's cosmos, as well as his fight with Holmes over Reichenbach Falls and its ambiguous conclusion. Moreover, in order to try to convey the workings of the Great Detective's brain, a lot of stop-and-go action and slow motion trickery is used, and the result tends to slow down even the best of the outrageous, shark-jumping chase scenes. So despite all of its good parts the movie is less than convincing as a story. I, at least, spent too much time throughout the picture enjoying one scene and then wondering when the next bit of fun was due to arrive.
So should you see the movie? Yes, but I think you'll have more fun when you rent it later, to watch with friends. Why? That way, you'll be able to hit the refrigerator or refresh your drinks during the dull parts. Just make sure you catch Watson's stag party, and Holmes pulling up with Watson to the scene of what is to be Watson's wedding... But if I say anything more, I'll need to resort to an lj-cut.
Just go see the picture for yourself--without children, preferably. There is a fair amount of gory violence and explosions that you may prefer to keep from young eyes, at least until you've vetted it first.
![[profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
The movie had a lot of what made the first Sherlock Holmes film a lot of fun: good period color (don't confuse that with meticulous authenticity, however) and great acting, especially from Downey, Jude Law as Dr. Watson, Kelly Reilly as Watson's bride, Mary, and Noomi Rapace, as Madam Simza, a gypsy fortune teller who managed to become entangled with the two. Rachel McAdams as Irene Adler makes some brief appearances at the beginning of the movie and then disappears, with suggestions that she has been permanently disposed of.
Unfortunately, the overall story was even weaker this time around. There were some great scenes, and some marvellous plot contrivances, but they are connected to each other by rather dull, all-dialogue scenes that are boring by virtue of their predictability (even when they are meant to contain plot clues). There were also increasing amounts of minor, but distracting, anachronisms, the most conspicuous of which turn up in the dialogue ("having a relationship"; "no pressure!") A large part of the problem with the script is that it has to deal with the difficulties in introducing Professor Moriarty into the movie's cosmos, as well as his fight with Holmes over Reichenbach Falls and its ambiguous conclusion. Moreover, in order to try to convey the workings of the Great Detective's brain, a lot of stop-and-go action and slow motion trickery is used, and the result tends to slow down even the best of the outrageous, shark-jumping chase scenes. So despite all of its good parts the movie is less than convincing as a story. I, at least, spent too much time throughout the picture enjoying one scene and then wondering when the next bit of fun was due to arrive.
So should you see the movie? Yes, but I think you'll have more fun when you rent it later, to watch with friends. Why? That way, you'll be able to hit the refrigerator or refresh your drinks during the dull parts. Just make sure you catch Watson's stag party, and Holmes pulling up with Watson to the scene of what is to be Watson's wedding... But if I say anything more, I'll need to resort to an lj-cut.
Just go see the picture for yourself--without children, preferably. There is a fair amount of gory violence and explosions that you may prefer to keep from young eyes, at least until you've vetted it first.