|
I had such great expectations for the film "Sherlock
Holmes",afterall, it is a "Guy Ritchie" film
and he has great talent, when he wants it ! The film has
fine actors and the trailer makes it seem like good ol'
action film with a touch of humor and creativity. None of
these features were able to keep me engaged after the first
five minutes.***
I'm sorry (Mr.Ritchie) but you have disappointed me.***
Let's start with what I did enjoy.***
I found the cinematography fantastic, the saturation
of colors adding the dark blues, blacks and rich pinks,
reds and greens, an overall beautiful canvas to watch. The
background was visually stimulating and the one thing I
respect about (Richtie) is he uses fast and small motion
effectively.***
The list is short and within a few minutes of the film
I was no longer interested and even the visual stimulation
couldn't keep me intrigued. Even the acting though strong
was too individual.***
I found the film boring with a story line dry and it
gave me the idea it was a psychotic representation of "Harry
Potter" for the older crowd. "Lord Blackburn"
had potential of being a strong villain but it missed all
the points of intrigue and suspense. I watched his character
cast a spell on a girl, in the very beginning of the film,
I was more involved in the way "Sherlock Holmes"
was getting through the guards then the curiosity or suspense
of what would happen to the girl who was possessed. My adrenaline
didn't even spike, not even once. Okay. Sure. It's only,
now, the first ten minutes it could potential get better.
(NOPE). One should always know, much like the beginning
of a book, if you aren't hooked, get rid of it.***
I found the segments that were supposed to be intense
and suspenseful fall short . (Holmes) and (Watson) were
in the pig house and are trying to release (Irene) from
being cut in half but It was flat and I found myself yawning.
Perhaps it was about how (Holmes) would use his "intelligent"
to free her and what's going to happen now, is she going
to make it? "Save her already, let's move on."
I found "Robert Downey Jr's" representation
of (Holmes) ridiculous and a bit disgraceful to the original
idea of what he is. He was a cross between (Bernie) from
"Weekend at Bernie's" and "Diane Keaton's"
entire wardrobe. The character was taken too far, it no
longer became a new twist on an old character but a joke.
The world seems to love (Downey) and good for him, he has
made a storm on his come backs but does all his characters
have to be exactly the same? Did "Robert De Niro"
bring (James "Jimmy" Conway) of "Godfather" fully
back when he played (Jack Brynes) in "Meet the Parents"?
No!, he added his hard ass known style effectively in a
comedy and shooting himself forward as a successful comedian.
While watching him play this role it made me annoyed, I
have seen him perform that fast spoken character in "Iron
Man" and even "Tropic Thunder", it didn't
work here although he did win the "2010 Golden Globe
Award" for (Best Actor in Comedy or Musical.)***
I found "Jude Law's" character, (Watson),
strong however in the sense of acting not in selling his
character.***
As for the (Watson's) lady (Mary Morstan), I couldn't
understand the choice in actor, although "Kelly Reilly"
is a beautiful woman, the on screen charisma and meshing
with (Law) was disappointing, there was nothing there. Though
she was a (Governess), I felt the dark hues on her face,
the sunken dark eyes, and dark clothing gave her a suspicion
about her, almost a black widow theme. That's all I kept
thinking about, was she going to try and poison (Watson's)
drink or perhaps use her comb to stab (Holmes?) Perhaps
that is what her character will become but they just didn't
seem "in love." I can understand she was to love (Watson)
for who he was and the job he did, but she might have been
given more innocence or grace. Soften the eyes, ease on
the dark aura of her and if she is to be bad in the sequel
it will throw off the viewers.***
Finally the assessment of "Rachel McAdams"
character (Irene.) She was a thief, a temperist and (Holmes')
heartbreaker. I find her an accomplished and well deserved
actress however her on-screen presence was lost in this
film, she seemed to try to hard. She wanted to pull the
roll off and that goes right down to her wardrobe. She wore
dark pinks with big bustles and then men's clothing and
yet her face was pale, calm and fresh. An idea of what (Mary)
should have been. Perhaps the pinks and reds were giving
the idea of a gypsy or temptress and they didn't want to
take the sex away from her. I almost forgot who she was
in the film. Thinking to myself the connection of love between
her and (Holmes) was there and then it wasn't.***
|
