Warner Bros. Reimagining Sherlock Holmes

[Doctor Jones]

Good to hear that you're seeing it Carmine. I hope you like it. It's unique and has that Ritchie edge to it, but it's still very much the character.

 

[Ziggyman]

Sorry to get off all the Holmes crap but...

...was the Inception trailer new...or the same old teaser...?

 

[TheComicbookKid]

It was the English version of the recent French trailer. It's supposed to be online tomorrow anyway.

 

[Ziggyman]

Ah...thanks mate...

 

[The Navigator]

Edit.

 

[Shelly Godfrey]

I just saw it. It was good, but not great. I enjoyed it and was entertained but I wasn't on the edge of my seat in suspense until the very end, and considering it's a mystery movie that's a bad sign. Also, I couldn't stand Rachel McAdams' character and think she did a terrible job, which is a shame because I usually think she's great. Although to be fair, she didn't have much to work with - her character was painfully shallow and one-dimensional. On the other hand, Robert Downey Jr. (swoon) and Jude Law were great. Especially RDJ. But he always does a good job so no surprises there.

And damn, the Holmes/Watson gay subtext went past the realm of subtext; it was just plain ol' TEXT.

Overall I'd give it an 8.5, but if I have to round I'll round down to an 8. Liked it, but didn't love it.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^I think McAdams was failed by the script too.

You pretty much have the exact same opinion I had of the film down to the swooning.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Why can't too guys be best friends anymore without it being gay subtext? Just enjoy each other's company and feel safe cuddled in each other's big strong arms. Just a guy's guy!

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Why can't too guys be best friends anymore without it being gay subtext? Just enjoy each other's company and feel safe cuddled in each other's big strong arms. Just a guy's guy!

I thought that the Gay subtex was on purpose though. I felt the movie was playing it up as a joke.

 

[VenomVsSpidey]

One of the things my group of friends deceided unanimously after seeing the film was that we need to get the soundtrack

I'm gonna pick it up when it arrives next year!

 

[TheComicbookKid]

I thought that the Gay subtex was on purpose though. I felt the movie was playing it up as a joke.

I felt the same. Though I'm not sure it would have played as noticeably had Downey and Law not had such good chemistry. It was basically just the Odd Couple.

I was actually joking to the larger point of "bromance" being over used. Hopefully, that stays in the last decade.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I felt the same. Though I'm not sure it would have played as noticeably had Downey and Law not had such good chemistry. It was basically just the Odd Couple.

I think that it would have been just as noticable, I just think that we wouldn't have given a s**t because the two actors chemistry wouldn't have been as good.

I was actually joking to the larger point of "bromance" being over used. Hopefully, that stays in the last decade.

I like saying Bromance...eventhough I shouldn't.

 

[Heretic]

I just saw it...

First of all, I must say that I was blessed with the world's worst audience to watch this with. During the Inception trailer (honestly the main reason why I saw this movie) a group of people came in and stood in front of me yelling for their friends...so, all I saw of it was a spinning top and then the word Inception at the end.

But on with the movie...

There was an older couple next to us, and apparently the man thought that he was in the movie. He had quips during every scene that he must have thought we're clever, and every time he figured a plot point out (a full minute after the movie explains it I might add) he then loudly proclaims that he's figured it out. His comments like "Oh, Sherlock, you always know the answers..." and "I believe your lady friend may be a bit of trouble" got annoying after the first hour or so.

Secondly, I the woman behind me laughed at every joke...mysteriously about 5 secons after the joke was over. It was weird, like each joke was a time lapse grenade or something that ticked off in her head a little bit slower.

But this is a film review...honestly, I didn't really like it. It was cute at parts, but just not very good. I may be the only man on earth who doesn't find Rachel McAdams attractive at all. Downey and Law were god at their roles though. I simply wasn't very caught up in the film as it seemed like your average "blockbuster" attempt...or a stab at a new James Bond type franchise. It is a bit bothersome that Sherlock is so much smarter than me. I mean, in a mystery movie, I should be trying to piece the puzzle together but before I can, the movie should assemble it and I have my "OH MY" moment. The problem is that the only way to even know what half the puzzle pieces are would be to have knowledge that most movie goers wont. When the answers are explained, I just had to take his word for it that the facts and science he was talking about were true because I just dont know. I had no chance of solving this mystery.

BUT, it was a fun movie and RDJ and Law are great in their roles. I dont think the movie amounts to much at all...it wasn't great, wasn't terrible. It's a solid Netflix rent if you haven't seen it.

 

[samsnee]

But this is a film review...honestly, I didn't really like it. It was cute at parts, but just not very good. I may be the only man on earth who doesn't find Rachel McAdams attractive at all. Downey and Law were god at their roles though. I simply wasn't very caught up in the film as it seemed like your average "blockbuster" attempt...or a stab at a new James Bond type franchise. It is a bit bothersome that Sherlock is so much smarter than me. I mean, in a mystery movie, I should be trying to piece the puzzle together but before I can, the movie should assemble it and I have my "OH MY" moment. The problem is that the only way to even know what half the puzzle pieces are would be to have knowledge that most movie goers wont. When the answers are explained, I just had to take his word for it that the facts and science he was talking about were true because I just dont know. I had no chance of solving this mystery.

BUT, it was a fun movie and RDJ and Law are great in their roles. I dont think the movie amounts to much at all...it wasn't great, wasn't terrible. It's a solid Netflix rent if you haven't seen it.

I thought the movie was good enough, carried by the two leads' chemistry, but I agree with you on McAdams. I don't deny she's attractive, but I've never been attracted to her. Her character was very underwritten.

As for the mystery itself, it's been awhile since I read the books, but I think that's how they usually went. Holmes solved the mystery because he knew about some weird plant that no one else knows about, or some chemical reaction that only a scientist would figure out. What bothered me more though was that the villain's plan was basically

Spoiler

paying off a lot of people to fake his death and "magic". I couldn't really buy that no one would see the hook in the noose after he was hung..

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

But this is a film review...honestly, I didn't really like it. It was cute at parts, but just not very good. I may be the only man on earth who doesn't find Rachel McAdams attractive at all. Downey and Law were god at their roles though. I simply wasn't very caught up in the film as it seemed like your average "blockbuster" attempt...or a stab at a new James Bond type franchise. It is a bit bothersome that Sherlock is so much smarter than me. I mean, in a mystery movie, I should be trying to piece the puzzle together but before I can, the movie should assemble it and I have my "OH MY" moment. The problem is that the only way to even know what half the puzzle pieces are would be to have knowledge that most movie goers wont. When the answers are explained, I just had to take his word for it that the facts and science he was talking about were true because I just dont know. I had no chance of solving this mystery.

I actually thought the mystery was a little too predictable. The only thing that I didn't accurately predict about it was...

Spoiler

Moriarty being after the trigger mechanism for Blackwood's bomb rather than the gas canisters.

 

[Heretic]

I dont doubt that Sherlock solved cases in the books the same way, I just dont find it very involving. It's very much a "watch what I do now" type gimmick where you the reader or viewer could never solve the mystery so there's no reason to get involved in more than a popcorn level. For me, that is ultimately less satisfying than spending an hour trying to figure it out, just to see that it was right there all along and I just missed it.

 

[Heretic]

I actually thought the mystery was a little too predictable. The only thing that I didn't accurately predict about it was...

Spoiler

Moriarty being after the trigger mechanism for Blackwood's bomb rather than the gas canisters.

The mystery was predictable??? You must be one heck of a chemist to have guessed all of the different reasons why things happened!

[BLACKOUT]The honey glue that was used on the stone, you've heard of this stuff? The chemical used to kill the old man in the tub...you were aware of that going in? What was the name of the odorless chemical that sprayed on the guy that caused him to burst into flames?? I mean...you figured it all out, so surely you must have outside knowledge of the chemical...etc etc etc[/BLACKOUT]

 

[TNC9852002]

Any discussion yet on who could play Prof. M in the sequel?

 

[Timstuff]

This year has had a few surprise hits, and this was certainly one of them. I loved this movie!

 

[echostation]

maybe they will cast Jan Michael Vincent for Moriarty?

 

[That-Guy]

My girlfriend and I had an hour-long discussion about that after the film. I mentioned the Brad Pitt rumor to her and her reaction was "HELL NO!" While I don't share those exact sentiments, I do have to admit that I'm not sure Pitt is right for the role. I do like him and I wouldn't be opposed to seeing him as another character in the series, but I don't think he's right for the Professor.

A few actors we considered...

Liam Neeson
Jason Isaacs
Stellan Skarsgaard
Ian McShane
DANIEL DAY LEWIS (this probably would never happen, but just imagine it)
James Frain
Rufus Sewell

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The mystery was predictable??? You must be one heck of a chemist to have guessed all of the different reasons why things happened!

[BLACKOUT]The honey glue that was used on the stone, you've heard of this stuff? The chemical used to kill the old man in the tub...you were aware of that going in? What was the name of the odorless chemical that sprayed on the guy that caused him to burst into flames?? I mean...you figured it all out, so surely you must have outside knowledge of the chemical...etc etc etc[/BLACKOUT]

Nope.

Spoiler

The specific chemicals used don't matter. I figure most of it was Hollywood science anyways. What was important is that Blackwood was using chemistry to mimic magical spells, which was the point of the investigation of the lab. From there it isn't much a leap to figure out that the guy who caught on fire was covered by some sort of flammable liquid, or that Blackwood had ingested something that mimicked the effects of death, or that he was going to gas Parliament while keeping his followers safe with the antidote, and so forth. Blackwood's scheme is little more than an elaborate Scooby Doo plot.

You don't need to know much about science as much as you need to have seen or read enough fiction. The plot, while fun and executed very well in this case, isn't exactly original.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I dont doubt that Sherlock solved cases in the books the same way, I just dont find it very involving. It's very much a "watch what I do now" type gimmick where you the reader or viewer could never solve the mystery so there's no reason to get involved in more than a popcorn level. For me, that is ultimately less satisfying than spending an hour trying to figure it out, just to see that it was right there all along and I just missed it.

I'm not really bothered by not knowing enough of the science to figure it out for myself. I dont know what they're talking about on House, but I still find the mystery and the process of figuring out the mystery interesting.

Holmes was like that in the books all the time. He would use some sort of little known fact that nobody who didn't read encyclopedias for fun would know to solve cases.

I for one enjoyed the movie quite a bit. RDJ was great as Holmes, and THANK GOD the writers finally decided to write Watson more the way he was in the books and not as an idiot just for comic relief.

I'm not sure where people are getting this gay subtext thing, unless you take it as others have said, and that it's being played as a joke. I wouldn't say it was implied they were gay at all. It was like others have said, more of an "Odd Couple" relationship.

 

[TNC9852002]

From a physical standpoint, DDL would be brilliant. Some of the other choices are slightly more typecast.

 

[Heretic]

Nope.

Spoiler

The specific chemicals used don't matter. I figure most of it was Hollywood science anyways. What was important is that Blackwood was using chemistry to mimic magical spells, which was the point of the investigation of the lab. From there it isn't much a leap to figure out that the guy who caught on fire was covered by some sort of flammable liquid, or that Blackwood had ingested something that mimicked the effects of death, or that he was going to gas Parliament while keeping his followers safe with the antidote, and so forth. Blackwood's scheme is little more than an elaborate Scooby Doo plot.

You don't need to know much about science as much as you need to have seen or read enough fiction. The plot, while fun and executed very well in this case, isn't exactly original.

That ridiculous. When you go into a mystery with the attitude of "I'm sure the bad guy did it, but I dont care how" then what is the point of the mystery? The purpose of mystery fiction is for the reader/viwer to be intrigued and attempt to figure it out. You are saying that none of details mattered, and that all that mattered was the "why" of the crime. You admit that you didn't figure that out, and you admit that you didn't figure out any of the other things that Sherlock figured out...so why do you think it was too easy to figure out???