Sherlock Holmes Movie Report

Most movies today are aimed at mentally challenged, deaf, 14 year old boys. Today's directors like Michael Bay lower one's expectations to such a degree that you're relieved when a film turns out not to be completely unwatchable. Such was the case with "Mockney" Guy Ritchie's new film Sherlock Holmes (or since the whole thing was a set up for a franchise should that be "Sherlock Holmes 1")

Naturally as a Brit I can't watch anything Sherlock Holmes without comparing it to the definitive portrayal of Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce:



I re-watched "The Hound of the Baskervilles" (1939) last night and I have to say that as far as mood, atmosphere and the ability to understand what the actors are saying is concerned, it's better than Ritchie's effort.

Having said that, I think Ritchie did a good job. The studios need everything aimed at 14 year old deaf retarded kids of course, and he kept that in mind, with some martial arts and some explosions. But he also threw in some stuff for us old farts to enjoy as well.

The special effects were outstanding, especially the way they included Tower Bridge when it was still under construction.




Less impressive was how they had the heroes running around in the cellars under the Palace of Westminster and yet emerge at said Tower Bridge, three miles away.

The Thames was also not known for its shipbuilding industry! And the river is too shallow for a large boat to sink and completely disappear.

Well, at the moment it is, anyway...