Being a fan of Conan Doyle's magnum opus 'Sherlock Holmes', there was never any chance that I would miss any opportunity to watch any series or movies based on that. With the first movie being something of the genre that I like a lot, I definitely watched the second with a lot of expectations. I hope that doesn't bias my review of the movie.
The movie is set in the 1890s London, Paris and Switzerland. Its starts on a lighter note of Watson getting married to Mary and Sherlock Holmes deploring it because he considers himself just as good as any companion Watson will ever need. But within a few minutes, into the story is thrust, probably one of the most brilliant sketched antagonists of all time, James Moriarty. The scenes pass by in a much faster way than the books and that kept me engrossed.
A perfect adaptation of any story, into a movie, that is not set in the current age is not possible. Guy Ritchie has warped the characters in such a way that they are better in a movie. The mood and pace, vastly vary from Jeremy Brett's Holmes, with explosions and action sequences. But I'm not complaining.
The movie centres around the feud between Moriarty and Holmes, with Watson being involved in it for obvious reasons. Mycroft is portrayed by the great Stephen Fry who does a great job while referring to Sherlock as Sherly. Some of the best scenes in the movie, are very intelligently, reserved for the duologue between Holmes and Moriarty. One other scene that I couldn't help but stare in awe is the scene where Holmes, Watson and Simza are running from the bullet fire. Music by Hans Zimmer took the experience to another level, with the precise use of violins, banjos. But something that I felt was utterly overboard was the plastic surgery. I cannot fathom any such advanced techniques existing in the 1890s, though I might be wrong about this point. Also, one of the major point that was not addressed was the one about the new-age radio. Also, the last movie ended with the death of a cop, to which no continuity in this movie is provided.
My rating: 8/10.
The movie is set in the 1890s London, Paris and Switzerland. Its starts on a lighter note of Watson getting married to Mary and Sherlock Holmes deploring it because he considers himself just as good as any companion Watson will ever need. But within a few minutes, into the story is thrust, probably one of the most brilliant sketched antagonists of all time, James Moriarty. The scenes pass by in a much faster way than the books and that kept me engrossed.
A perfect adaptation of any story, into a movie, that is not set in the current age is not possible. Guy Ritchie has warped the characters in such a way that they are better in a movie. The mood and pace, vastly vary from Jeremy Brett's Holmes, with explosions and action sequences. But I'm not complaining.
The movie centres around the feud between Moriarty and Holmes, with Watson being involved in it for obvious reasons. Mycroft is portrayed by the great Stephen Fry who does a great job while referring to Sherlock as Sherly. Some of the best scenes in the movie, are very intelligently, reserved for the duologue between Holmes and Moriarty. One other scene that I couldn't help but stare in awe is the scene where Holmes, Watson and Simza are running from the bullet fire. Music by Hans Zimmer took the experience to another level, with the precise use of violins, banjos. But something that I felt was utterly overboard was the plastic surgery. I cannot fathom any such advanced techniques existing in the 1890s, though I might be wrong about this point. Also, one of the major point that was not addressed was the one about the new-age radio. Also, the last movie ended with the death of a cop, to which no continuity in this movie is provided.
My rating: 8/10.
No comments:
Post a Comment