I’ll say that I had high hopes for Sherlock Holmes after watching the initial trailers for it. The cast for one grabbed my attention immediately. Robert Downey Jr, Jude Law, and Rachel McAdams all made the list for this exciting adventure. Not to mention the art style of the composition had certainly caught my eye. After having finally seen this movie however, there were parts of it I hadn’t expected.After re-viewing the trailers, I think an entire scene featuring Irene (McAdams) facing off against Holmes (Downey Jr.) was cut or replaced entirely. This isn’t entirely uncommon in the film industry. In fact, it happens all the time, but I feel this scene was part of the reason I felt this movie would be more action oriented than it was. It had its fair share of action of course, but the dialogue weighed heavier throughout the course of the movie.
Speaking of, the dialogue in the movie was well written. The playful banter between Holmes and Watson was nothing short of amusing, and all the discussion of Blackwood’s plan kept things interesting. My only complaint would have to be that Holmes himself would often speak some of his dialogue very quickly and quietly, as if to himself. While this made a great distinction of his character, there were times I found him inaudible, which only blurred the scenario for me. For example, there’s a moment when a woman, insulted, splashes Holmes with her wine glass. I ended up watching this movie twice, and neither time could I make out exactly what he said to make her do it. I got the general idea of it, and filled in the lines myself, but it’s very frustrating when you’re trying to listen in and you still can’t make out what’s being said.
On a note of the CG elements of the movie, I’m a little disappointed. Earlier I mentioned how interested I was in the style of the movie. But there were scenes in this film that didn’t quite go together with the others in my opinion. The film is set in London with a dark, dank, Sweeney Todd-esque feel to it. But whether it was the texture of the environments or the composition of the shots, the backdrops of many of the scenes felt very CG to me. And while we all understand it’s CG, it doesn’t have to look it. That said, the environments and matte paintings were enjoyable to look at, and were overall “designed” well. It was mainly the composition that suffered.
Something else, I’ve loved Rachel McAdams since I first saw her in Red Eye, but as excited as I was that she was in this film, she didn’t really fit in it for me. Sometimes you see a movie, and instead of seeing a brand new character, you instead see the same actor or actress you’ve seen dozens of times before. And you know what it was this time? Her voice. She had the personality down I guess. Maybe. But she didn’t change her voice at all. She didn’t even have a British accent. She sounded the same as she did in Red Eye, Family Stone, hell even Mean Girls, and her character design didn’t really fit the scenario either. Makeup was nothing special, and the dresses and hair, while nice, didn’t match her surroundings for me.
That said, I did still enjoy this film. It felt a little lengthy for a two-hour movie, but I thought the revival of Sherlock Holmes was well done. I don’t know how accurate it was to past versions of Holmes, but the character was entertaining nonetheless. His bond with Watson was like that between brothers, having each other’s backs but constantly at a rivalry. The villain in Blackwood was also an interesting concept and well carried out. His supernatural powers being used in dreary old England was well received and intriguing.
Spoilers Section
There are two things I have to make note of here. When it came to Blackwood’s feux-black magic, I not only liked the explanations for his black magic, but also the way that Holmes explained how he did them. I’m always a sucker for those “Oh, THAT’S why” revelations, but sometimes they’re a little in over my head and I just accept things as fact. I’m no scientist, nor am I an alchemist, but a lot of chemical compounds were used in his mixtures of devilry. Regardless of that, even though they were throwing out terms of pri-mordium sulfate and rhidocronkite and other such gibberish, the imagery used to help display everything that was going on really helped fill in the pieces of a blind man’s puzzle.
Aside from that, it’s pretty clear they’ll be making a sequel to this film. And it was mentioned throughout the movie that someone was pulling the strings behind Blackwood, so I really expected we’d get some foresight into professor whats-his-name. But instead, he was only revisited at the very end with a name reveal, and a mention that he’d stolen a piece of some machine. Some may call that genius planning. I call it frustrating. At least until I see Sherlock Holmes 2. Then I’ll probably call it genius planning.
0 comments:
Post a Comment