Less Elementary Than Was Hoped For

I'm smart. Well, sort of. I mean, I do well in class, can usually communicate in clever ways with my peers, and am probably a little too self-congratulatory when it comes to my ideas for scripts. But, in no way am I smart enough to be a detective, and in no way am as smart as Sherlock Holmes. The character created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle makes most modern day man, and women, come to think of it, look like bumbling buffoons. And if this modern day version of Holmes is to be taken seriously as a faithful interpretation of the character, he will kick your ass, drink you under the table, and be completely helpless when it comes to bromance. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, in addition to having a title that I regret to admit I confuse with Game of Thrones, is a bigger, louder, more grandiose film than it's predecessor, and while it does do some things well, it does enough wrong and repeats enough of the mistakes from the first one to not warrant a full recommendation. Like the last one, it is still a lot of fun, but not much else.

Extreme Bromance!

Only Mildly Elementary...

I'm gonna keep this short. I have some college apps to finish...

So, Sherlock Holmes is a reimagining, of sorts, where the super sleuth looses the deer stalker cap and magnifying glass, and is instead a tough-as-nails, hard drinking, badass with an attitude. His partner, Dr. Watson is about to move out of their flat on 221 B Baker Street with his fiance, which is leaving the good detective in a funk. Nothing like a case involving an evil lord returned from the dead, the occult, and a plan to overthrow the entire British government to liven up one's day. It's an interesting plot, but it ends on a pretty anti-climatic note. It's enough to keep you interested in between brawls.
Robert Downey Jr. plays Holmes. He's a pleasure to watch, very funny and tough. Jude Law is Watson, who is also good. His verbal sparring with Downey Jr. is some of the best this year. It's an interesting interpretation of the first bromance in history. Rachel McAdams is Irene Adler, the love interest for Holmes. She's fine, I guess, but she is just overpowered in every scene by Downey and Law. Mark Strong is the villain, Lord Blackwood. He's very good up until the end. At first he's quiet, subdued, and oh so scary. Then he drops all that in favor of a bombastic and loud revelation to the masses. Performances are alright, with Downey clearly the best.
Guy Ritchie, who, as you know, is responsible for films like Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels, Snatch and Rock n Rolla, directs, with his usual frenetic style. There are some undeniably cool scenes, but it gets boring after a short while, so that the final confrontation of top of Tower Bridge just feel halfhearted. There are some funny moments, especially when Holmes and Watson are bickering, but the rest of the plot makes very little sense, and just seems like filler so that we can get to the big twist in the very end that sets up inevitable sequels. I hate it when people do that.
Sherlock Holmes is alright if you are just looking for some cheap movie going fare for the rest of your holidays. But, at 128 minutes, it's almost as long as Avatar, which is much better use of your money. There's some hope for the franchise, if this is the direction that the character is going, but, as it stands, Sherlock Holmes is fun, but completely unnecessary. B-