Last night I was shocked. SHOCKED. There are so many things that were wrong with it that I just can't bring myself to write only one post (which explains the part 1 in the title. duh.). Post # 1 will be about the portrayal of characters.
My first problem, and probably one of the biggest of the film is that apparently no one has ever read any of the Sherlock Holmes stories and/or novels. Okay so they got a couple of names right, congratulations on getting Sherlock, Watson, Lestrade, Irene Adler, and professor Moriarty's names right! Yay for you. Also yay for getting the idea that Holmes solves crimes and that he lives in 221b Baker Street in London England. But that's about it.
For starters, Sherlock was a man of reason, and while he did use drugs and go into depressive spells for long periods of time, he wasn't the SOB that was portrayed in the film. He even gave credit to Lestrade after solving a crime (although he was fond of ridiculing him) and he wasn't a jerk to Watson, only a little condescending. On the aspect of the fighting and being tough, I have to mention that Holmes was indeed a boxer at some point in his life but this is not how he went ahead in his cases. Holmes was an educated classy dude and he went through his detective work by means of deduction and thinking, he rarely confronted adversaries as he did in the movie and when it happened he had his gun and a clever escape plan. For example, take the Case of the Speckled Band, in the story he waits until the villain leaves his house and goes in undetected, then enters again when the guy is asleep (I'll say no more on the matter I don't wanna ruin the story for you, go read it or google it if you're lazy).
On the other hand, Watson wasn't a smartass all the time, he never punched Sherlock (also, Sherlock wasn't really opposed to Watson's wedding) and most of the time he really wanted to go on cases. He admired Holmes' deductive skills and wanted to be like him, he sometimes had insights but Holmes was always two steps ahead of him. I also believe watson had a limp and he wasn't a tall, suave man ready for action, especially he wasn't Jude Law (but more on that at some later time when I discuss good alternatives for the actors).
These two guys I would have made them more like the original characters. Take away all that crap that makes this a popular movie for the masses. Sherlock's popularity was in the intrigue, in the mystery and suspense. Not every movie has to have craploads of action, there can be exciting highlights in something different. I know that this remake was meant to make Sherlock Holmes "cool" again but this isn't the way to do it because that wasn't Sherlock Holmes, it was more like the Arnold Schwarzenegger or Sylvester Stallone of the 1800's. So don't get me wrong, this was a good action movie about an old time detective but it wasn't Sherlock Holmes, it wasn't what it was supposed to be and that's why I didn't like it.
Expect one or two more posts on this movie dealing with the casting and wardrobe choices and the whole supernatural aspect of the movie.
Love you guys. Bye :)
For more info:
The movie
Old TV Show
Original Stories
