February 3, 2010: Sherlock Holmes
A movie about Sherlock Holmes? Directed by Guy Ritchie? Starring Robert Downey, Jr? If this sounds strange, imagine how it must have sounded to the guys who were asked to sign over $100 million to make it happen.
Well, I guess Sherlock Holmes provides a solid story base. And Guy Ritchie took the world by storm a decade ago with Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998) and Snatch (2000), although I haven’t much liked anything he’s done since then. And Robert Downey Jr. has gone through a number of career ups and downs but he seems to be on a serious upswing right now, thanks in large part to Iron Man (2008) and Tropic Thunder (2008). So let’s see whether this all comes together to kick off a compelling Sherlock Holmes franchise, or whether it falls on its face.
The reason I’m watching this in the first place is for the two Oscar nominations, for the art direction and for Hans Zimmer’s score. Sherlock Holmes performs well on both fronts. The box office numbers were impressive, which means that a sequel will surely come to pass (advance buzz has us seeing the next instalment in 2011). And with me not being a reader of the original Sherlock Holmes material, I wasn’t bothered by what I presume to be grievous departures from the canon – I don’t typically hear of hand-to-hand combat sprinkled throughout the Holmes stories, although I expect his lippy attitude and eye for detail are only stylistically and not improperly exaggerated. Downey really sells the character, with his fast-talking persona, and it seems right.
The story itself, about a secret society trying to take over the British government through the use of black magic, is serviceable and ties up nicely at the end, in a nod to Holmes’ mantra that logic can always get to the root of what has happened. The theme of technology giving people the edge over the ignorant masses is a compelling one, as obvious power plays a century ago based on significant mechanical and electrical inventions are supplanted today with more devious and longer-term ploys to get people reliant on a particular tool or technology and to control the tool. The film was long but not quite overlong. Downey as Holmes and Jude Law as Watson both impressed me, but Rachel McAdams seemed out of place and out of her league as a supposedly accomplished American thief, and Mark Strong as usual failed to connect with me in his portrayal here of the main villain. I never believed him to be as sinister as Ritchie wanted me to believe he was.
I can live with Sherlock Holmes as a franchise, and this first entry is a bit scattered but a satisfying ride in the end. I could totally see it disintegrating in the manner of the Pirates of the Caribbean films, into a completely incomprehensible mess, but I hope it doesn’t go too far in that direction. I’ll give the second one a shot.
Downey continues his impressive career revival.
Post a Comment