Dir. Guy Ritchie, UK/Australia/US, 128mins, 2009
Cast: Robert Downey Jnr, Jude Law, Mark Strong, Rachel McAdams, Eddie Marsen
Review by Matthew Rodgers
Even the most meticulous of sleuths would struggle to find the evidence linking this franchise launcher to its Baker Street based origins. Gone is the deer stalker hat and long coat, gone is the slow Poirot paced unravelling mystery. In fact so much is gone beyond the obvious names and location that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's complete works must have gathered dust in the production meetings.
In its place are bare knuckle brawls, moody landscapes, and more homoeroticism than 300 's Spartans attending an Erasure concert. Oh, and it's all conducted by former gossip column regular and unfairly lambasted director, Guy Ritchie. So the possibilities to play on “ Sherlock, Schlock & Two Smoking Barrels” we re endless and possibly a lot more fun than the film.
We open this case with Holmes (Downey Jnr) and Watson (Law) on one of their final missions before our moustachioed doctor settles down with his wife to be. During their pursuit of the mysterious Lord Blackwood (Strong) and his apparent return from beyond the grave to fulfil that old cliché of “taking over the world”, it's obvious to all that our investigative duo are co-dependent on each other. Cue bickering, posturing, and fighting, all against a backdrop of explosions and ridiculous set-pieces that only mildly detract from a muddled plot.
The magnifying glass must first focus firmly on Downey Jnr, here delivering an intermittently bad performance as the dishevelled detective. It's clearly his attempt at “doing a Jack Sparrow”, but with his jumbled “mockney” accent and rather irritating mannerisms, the result is far from charming.
Faring much better is Jude Law. His stiff upper lip approach to acting suits the character of Watson perfectly. Expecting as we are that Downey Jnr will be the one with the triumphant comedic moments, it's actually Law who gets the wry asides spot on. He is the dominant figure to Holmes' rather petulant child and is pretty handy in the combat stakes too. Did you ever think you would hear Jude Law shout “ nut ‘im ”, whilst holding down a villain? Ok, so it is a Guy Ritchie movie.
The two of them are quite an odd combination and while it is refreshing to have avoided enduring another origin story (Wolverine – bad, Star Trek – good), a bit of background would have been nice. It may have anchored things better dramatically and explained this clear desire that they obviously have for each other. Their relationship goes way beyond the typical buddy bromance. Holmes is trying to break up Watson's imminent marriage and you don't need detective 101 to read between the lines. It adds a certain comedic charm that's otherwise absent from them as a double act.
But, just in case this is too suggestive for a mainstream audience, both of them are also given romantic interests. Kelly Reilly does well with her limited screen time as Watson's would-be bride but it's McAdams who wades through the testosterone to be more than a bit-part player. Full of sass and the equal of Holmes' scheming tactician, she gets to do far more than just be the damsel in distress plot mechanism.
And what of Ritchie, still existing in his comfort zone of “the big smoke” but given the added press ure of launching a huge Warner Brothers potential cash cow? (The much publicised re-shoots are evident in the episodic nature of the plot). Well he's done a fantastic job on many levels. The murky London cityscape looks beautiful and is imposing in a way that the story's villain never is (Strong is completely wasted). The dissection of combat scenes, during which Holmes narrates the cause and effect of each of his punches, is a particularly nice gimmick. This is Ritchie's most mature work yet. It's just a shame he is working from a very inconsistent script.
Evidence A: A huge, highly im press ive, explosive set piece, during which our protagonists are battered all over the screen by various bits of flying debris is followed by the revelation that Watson simply has a broken arm, with which five minutes later he is perfectly able to fight?!?
Evidence B: This is the most criminal act of all. The plot of this Sherlock Holmes is such a behind closed doors affair that no hints are dropped for the audience to pick up on. No clues are left. There is no level of Usual Suspects mystery to it all. We simply don't get to see anything, until the plot decides it's come to a dead end and Downey Jnr proceeds to spout a load of circumstantial revelations like an episode of Scooby Doo.
There is enough here to suggest that further cases should be opened and with Ritchie on board, but the next investigation needs to be a lot more thorough and a hell of a lot more enjoyable. |
.jpg)
