Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Sherlock Holmes Movie

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Based on a trailer I saw of the soon to be released movie Sherlock Holmes, I'm afraid he is being depicted as some kind of action hero. There are hints that there may be some use of his intellect in solving the crime, but I had read elsewhere that Ritchie was trying to show that Holmes' intellect was also detrimental to him.

Edited by RationalBiker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do recall someone on this board once made the argument that things Hollywood produced were undeniably better than any other source, because they were mainstream.

I am not sure, but I think this trailer may have been the proverbial garlic to that particular vampire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judging from the trailer it seems like they're making a Shanghai Noon/Knights of Sherlock Holmes. While I did enjoy those movies I find it a shame that they're doing this with my second favorite detective(number one of course being Hercule Poirot). I would have loved to see a new, well-made, and serious Sherlock Holmes movie.

Oh, well... there's always the old tv-series with Jeremy Brett as Mr. Holmes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I admit my assessment is preliminary and based solely on the trailer, but I'm going to see the movie with the mindset of not expecting "my father's Sherlock Holmes". I would be more than pleased to see the deductive prowess of the world famous Holmes rule the day but that will not be my expectation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't wait to see what they do with that live-action film of Tin-Tin now.

"My god, Tin-Tin, they've stolen the Professor's shark-submarine!"

"Indeed, Captain Haddock. Shit's gonna get fucked up. Fucked up, Belgian style."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 4 months later...

We saw it last night and it was great! Reason and intellect prevail over mysticism. What more could an Objectivist want? :thumbsup:

(Also, the preview for Iron Man 2 was fantastic! Stark tells a congressional committee they can't have his device because it doesn't belong to the American people, "it's my property!") :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw Sherlock Holmes earlier this evening with my girlfriend. It was thoroughly enjoyable, and I actually really enjoyed the way Sherlock Holmes was portrayed. I've read the stories (or, most of them, as I'm finishing them up now), and I'm glad to say that my girlfriend is now interested in reading them as well (although, that'll have to wait until after I introduce her to The Fountainhead :P )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not recommend this movie to anyone.

Mostly because of the portrayal of the character and the presence of summer blockbuster-esque action scenes in what is primarily a cerebral series. The biggest enjoyment from a Holmes story is the use of his inductive reasoning and his rapport with Dr. Watson. The 'action' scenes in the books are few and far between and used primarily at the climax of the story (a chase, usually, or a confrontation.)

The best characterizations of Sherlock Holmes have been Basil Rathbone and Robert Stephens- and although the Rathbone movie series may have been flawed in certain instances (such as Dr. Watson being a bumbling fool) they have the character down pat. Stephens also had an admirable take on the character in "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes," which was a movie that built very well on the already established Doyle canon with some interesting elements (such as Gabrielle Valadon being a character that ends up being the equal to one Irene Adler from 'A Scandal in Bohemia.')

R.D.Jr should have steered clear from this script and from the character altogether. He is simply not someone that has the necessary qualities to portray a cerebral character (and the script doesn't do him any services.) Instead we have Sherlock Holmes, Action Hero, watered and dumbed down.

To anyone who loves Conan Doyle's only worthwhile creation, this movie and this character are nothing more than an attempt to lobotomize an excellent character for the sake of blockbuster mediocrity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kainscalla, I understand your position, but I thought it was very well done. There was only that one scene in the lab/house/boatyard that does not fit the "climax"-type description. The fight scene at the gambling ring has support from the stories (he referenced having done that sort of thing before, and he was an expert boxer, etc.). Even the fighting was done in a way which I thought fit very well with the character; he used a great knowledge of anatomy and fighting tactics to predict his opponents moves and find the most efficient way to disable them, with an accompanying estimation of the damage done (a nice touch, I thought, and something Holmes would almost certainly know how to calculate). Not only was the fighting often fairly cerebral, but there were many instances in the story where Holmes showed off his "deduction" chops, including the final climax of the story, where he puts everything together.

As a depiction of Sherlock Holmes, the character, I thought it was quite good, and the minor modifications I thought were justified and even good in the context of a movie (as opposed to a short story). As a depiction of a rational person pursuing their passion and justice, it was great. So, overall, it was a very good movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On this I am afraid we will have to disagree. I see no good execution, at best a sub-par rendering of a character that deserved a better treatment than the pandering to the lowest common denominator. Ritchie said he wanted to be 'authentic to Doyle.' Perhaps he should learn to read first- just an idle guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen it yet, but from what I've seen, trailer-wise, it seems like they're bringing the influence of Sherlock Holmes on HOUSE, M.D. back home. If you haven't noticed, House is Holmes and Wilson is Watson. The influence is intentional, with the added interpretation of House as a jackass whose intellect, as someone noted on this thread about the new Holmes, is as detrimental as it is beneficial. So interesting to see that dynamic come full circle, for better or worse...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care for House. I liked Sherlock Holmes. It was fun, entertaining, witty and as stated before, reason prevails over mysticism. This film is a huge step in the right direction for Hollywood and I was thoroughly entertained for my $10. I was not expecting perfection. It's Hollywood. C'mon. :dough:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not recommend this movie to anyone.

Mostly because of the portrayal of the character and the presence of summer blockbuster-esque action scenes in what is primarily a cerebral series. The biggest enjoyment from a Holmes story is the use of his inductive reasoning and his rapport with Dr. Watson. The 'action' scenes in the books are few and far between and used primarily at the climax of the story (a chase, usually, or a confrontation.)

The best characterizations of Sherlock Holmes have been Basil Rathbone and Robert Stephens- and although the Rathbone movie series may have been flawed in certain instances (such as Dr. Watson being a bumbling fool) they have the character down pat. Stephens also had an admirable take on the character in "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes," which was a movie that built very well on the already established Doyle canon with some interesting elements (such as Gabrielle Valadon being a character that ends up being the equal to one Irene Adler from 'A Scandal in Bohemia.')

R.D.Jr should have steered clear from this script and from the character altogether. He is simply not someone that has the necessary qualities to portray a cerebral character (and the script doesn't do him any services.) Instead we have Sherlock Holmes, Action Hero, watered and dumbed down.

To anyone who loves Conan Doyle's only worthwhile creation, this movie and this character are nothing more than an attempt to lobotomize an excellent character for the sake of blockbuster mediocrity.

You don't seem to mention any single thing from the movie to support your viewpoint. You just say that the movie has 'action', and that that's not Holmes.

I thought the movie was great, and since this thread is so negative, I will start one that says the movie was great, and there state my reasons for thinking this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am honored that you chose to quote my reply here to indicate the genesis of this great thread of yours.

You don't seem to mention any single thing from the movie to support your viewpoint. You just say that the movie has 'action', and that that's not Holmes.

I thought the movie was great, and since this thread is so negative, I will start one that says the movie was great, and there state my reasons for thinking this.

Edited by kainscalia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...