Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Sherlock Holmes

We PPVed the new "Sherlock Holmes" over the weekend. I had high hopes for it since I'd heard good reviews and the cast was solid. Downey, Law, and McAdams usually do solid work. I also figured it would be pretty tough to botch Sherlock Holmes.
I was mostly satisfied. The cast does a decent job with a lame story. Holmes and Watson are like an old married couple. They constantly bicker, but you believe the genuine affection between them. Downey is well cast as the hard living, egocentric, difficult Holmes. Law's stoic and tight laced war hero Watson is a good counter to Holmes. McAdams is OK, but doesn't have the chops to equal Downey or Law.
The plot is the real weakness of the movie. The secret society conspiring to take over the world is tired. I also never believed that the bad guys had the gravitas to fool Holmes. The hinting at Holmes' real enemy lurking in the shadows felt like a set up for a sequel instead of a key plot point.
The retooling of Holmes as an action hero worked well for me. In fact, I felt that the retooled Holmes was better for the big screen than the more Victorian Holmes. The action Holmes made the movie more of an escapist flick.
Overall, "Sherlock Holmes" was well worth the six bucks it cost to PPV. It may well have been worth full price if I'd had a rough week at work.

No comments:

Post a Comment