![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Sherlock Holmes
I went to see Sherlock Holmes.
Hm. I mean, I wasn't expecting classic Sherlock Holmes, with Holmes sitting in his room and solving the case while reclining on his sofa--I had seen the trailer after all. I was perfectly happy to see the world of Sherlock Holmes transformed into a Hollywood action world, with Holmes chasing criminals by jumping out of windows, etc.
But I did want the character to stay intact, and, idk. I didn't think he did? The plot of that movie was weak, and it was made even weaker by the fact that the director spent next to no time at all explaining where Holmes got his knowledge from. There was a one-minute montage at the end, and that was it. Movie-Holmes, to me, came across as a bit of an idiot who got told a lot by the script--I couldn't see his alleged brilliance, not in the movie. Everyone knows that Holmes is brilliant, so, okay, maybe you don't need to establish it--but you do need to show it. I think what bothered me was that as far as the characterization of Holmes went, there was a lot of telling going on, and very little showing.
Watson, on the other hand, I thought worked really well. His basic character traits were kept intact, as far as I could tell, and I liked the edge they gave him--he does come across as a bit slow in the books sometimes, and I thought they balanced that out well in the movie.
I think with some changes to the plot, and a different director, this movie could have been really good. As it was, it was kind of, well. Meh. I've seen better.
comment on LJ
Hm. I mean, I wasn't expecting classic Sherlock Holmes, with Holmes sitting in his room and solving the case while reclining on his sofa--I had seen the trailer after all. I was perfectly happy to see the world of Sherlock Holmes transformed into a Hollywood action world, with Holmes chasing criminals by jumping out of windows, etc.
But I did want the character to stay intact, and, idk. I didn't think he did? The plot of that movie was weak, and it was made even weaker by the fact that the director spent next to no time at all explaining where Holmes got his knowledge from. There was a one-minute montage at the end, and that was it. Movie-Holmes, to me, came across as a bit of an idiot who got told a lot by the script--I couldn't see his alleged brilliance, not in the movie. Everyone knows that Holmes is brilliant, so, okay, maybe you don't need to establish it--but you do need to show it. I think what bothered me was that as far as the characterization of Holmes went, there was a lot of telling going on, and very little showing.
Watson, on the other hand, I thought worked really well. His basic character traits were kept intact, as far as I could tell, and I liked the edge they gave him--he does come across as a bit slow in the books sometimes, and I thought they balanced that out well in the movie.
I think with some changes to the plot, and a different director, this movie could have been really good. As it was, it was kind of, well. Meh. I've seen better.
comment on LJ