'Sherlock Holmes: A Game Of Shadows' Review
A few things, before I start off my entirely too long-winded review. I'll not be around over the weekend, so I send out my sincerest compliments of the season to my dear f-listers. Can we have a group hug? *squeezes you all* <3
I've also created a Tumblr account after having lurked around it darkest depths for several months now. I resisted the urge to sign up over there but I am apparently weak and now have a Tumblr of my own. Come follow me over there if you like: www.autumnatmidnite.tumblr.com (To read this review on mai Tumblr, click here)
So. By now, I'm certain most of you are scratching your heads in bewilderment. What is this review you speak of? Were you not, in your own words, mortified by those trailers and the high potential for character bashing and the selling of sex? Yes, yes and double yes. Although in the latter case, it's only fair I call out the BBC for potentially doing the same with ASiB. But we shall see. And for now, I'll refrain from making any judgements until that episode is actually out.
For the record, I sort of saw 'A Game of Shadows' by accident - long story, that. Anyway, there were indeed scenes that were grating to watch and had my inner Sherlockian rocking itself in the corner, spilling tears of embarrassment. RDJ's British accent is abysmal as ever. It doesn't even make an attempt at approaching the intellectual level or characterizations we are treated to with 'Sherlock'. There were more explosions than one might shake a rather large stick at, and far too much action/slo-mo for my tastes.
That aside, if I'm to be honest, despite my initial reservations, 'A Game of Shadows' not only outshined its predecessor, at its heart was more substance than I ever thought possible.
With the first installment, I found myself enjoying the movie... just not the portrayals. With any Holmes adaption, no matter how loosely based on ACD’s stories it may be, I need to be convinced what I’m seeing on screen are more than just pale intimations of Holmes and Watson. Guy Ritchie definitely had his work cut out for him on that front, but credit does need to be given where it’s due. He clearly took pains to correct much of what was broken in his '09 effort, from the little touches to the major issues regarding the disjointed feel to his directing. The modernity and steampunk elements have been toned down somewhat, and the fact that two completely different (and talented) writers had scripted this one was more glaringly obvious than the slash.
A tangible effort was made to improve upon its predecessor’s often abysmal representations of my favourite literary characters, particularly in regards to improvements made in cleaning up Holmes' intolerable slovenliness - though by no means does he display the "quiet primness of dress" Watson wrote him as having, he is slightly more of a conventionally dressed gentleman here. Slightly.
And while RDJ's Holmes is far from the "introspective and pallid dreamer of Baker Street", we begin to see performances that become entirely more recognizable. Holmes' intelligence has been dulled for the sake of comic relief, I am sad to say, but in this film it is done in a more tolerable - even endearing - manner. With the exception of that scene on the train with Holmes in drag, which I thought was degrading in the most puerile of ways, making him into a clown for the lowest forms of comic relief. It was a moment of buffonery that was painful to watch, turning the tables on the old Rathbone flicks and making Holmes into the imbecile so those around him appear more intelligent.
I also confess to despising Jude Law's Watson in the first film, for what I thought was an uncalled for level of hostility. But in the sequel, that razor edge to his character was blunted, and we we are given a Watson who is exasperated, yet lurking underneath was a palpable fondness not present in the first installment. I could believe that underneath it all was a friendship, and that honestly made all the difference in convincing me this was the man who would willingly follow Holmes to the ends of the earth. We are shown the camaraderie and affection between Holmes and Watson that existed in Doyle's stories, and understand how it hurt them both when the doctor marries Mary Morstan. Regardless of how you view their relationship, this did pain Holmes in Canon, and I've never seen that heartbreak rendered so beautifully and respectfully as it was here.
I was especially taken with Jared Harris' performance as Professor Moriarity, and the back story surrounding him has quickly become a favourite with me. He was quite convincing as an amoral intellect to rival the foremost mind of his time - when they clash, it is genuinely frightening, and the shivers come not because we think he's some volatile nutter, but because his decided lack of a conscience becomes a true counterweight to Holmes' sense of justice. Holmes of Canon was a flawed man (why we love him, honestly) but he was also a good man. He would have come to the same conclusions about humanity and the coming wars as Moriarity did in this film, but opposed them all the same. He is a worthy opponent, and we feel this throughout.
One part I was especially impressed by was the clever way in which they wove in that depiction of Moriarity’s empire of crime which Holmes describes in ‘The Final Problem’: “He sits motionless, like a spider in the centre of its web, but that web has a thousand radiations and he knows well every quiver of each of them.” I can easily see this being credible; Holmes keeping a map to track his rival’s movements, and those strings used as markers each forming a web with its radiations all leading to Moriarity. Either way, it immediately brought that Canon quote to mind, and made me just a bit giddy. And while nearly-but-not-quite on par with Doyle, the Holmes - Moriarity clash is made into a credible war of wits.
Here we come to the minor characters. Irene Adler was more chafing than wool underwear, completely unnecessary, and that’s all I’ll say to keep this spoiler free. The gypsy woman (Simza?) was by no means some Mary-Sue type love interest meant to draw attention away from the blatant homoeroticism, and her character remained relevant to the plot. I can’t say she was wonderful, as she was still only a minor character, but her inclusion was handled vastly better than I expected. Stephen Fry as Mycroft… I have mixed feelings about ‘Frycroft’, a name by which I shall, from this moment on, refer to him with fondness. He certainly wasn’t poorly cast and was more memorable than most in the role, but he brings no real nuance or feeling to it as does Mark Gatiss. I adore Stephen Fry, he looks the part, he is quite familiar with Canon and so gives us as faithful a portrayal as he could, given the way he was written in. Sebastian Moran was fleshed out to excellent effect, a menacing presence throughout. I'll even go so far as to say the BBC has their work cut out for them in matching the Moran we were given in this movie.
Mary Morstan. She’s a character that often doesn’t translate well from page to screen, but here she shined through as a woman with a backbone who remains tolerant of her husband’s partnership with Holmes. This Mary understands who always comes first in Watson’s life, and yet, she is entirely adept on her own, and we catch glimpses of what was alluded to of her in ‘The Sign of the Four’, what first attracted Watson to her.
On that note, though, just as in Canon, it’s not Mary who owns Watson’s heart. Very clearly, it’s Holmes, which brings me to what I might normally refer to as the subtext, though squinting or the use of slash goggles is rendered irrelevant here, because what took ‘AGOS’ to another level were the elements of romance, the genuine love story, blended in with all the deductions and adventure. To my immense surprise and relief, the homoeroticism was beautifully rendered, my breath literally catching when Holmes takes Watson’s hand - a scene that is a familiar one in Canon, but has taken Guy Ritchie of all directors to finally and unabashedly render onscreen - then later when the two waltz. Together. Holmes and Watson. Dancing. And there was nothing contrived or undignified about it, as I suspected there might be, having heard of that scene beforehand.
The not so subtly portrayed love had one other unexpected effect. It made RDJ’s performance reach its pinnacle. Where we had an obnoxiously clingy Holmes in the first movie, we now see a man disturbed by his unrequited feelings but who is entirely more selfless, the ending scene on the balcony proving this magnificently. All Holmes’ deductions, every possible way in which he has perceived the situation could go, logically, are cast to the wind when Watson steps into the picture, and without a single word being spoken, we see that devotion carried out in the ultimate act of love. It was gorgeous, and I was left speechless.
So for all my criticisms and the fact that this is more graphic novel than Canon, and while it doesn't even approach the loyalty as that of the BBC adaptation, it does do ACD's immortal characters a bit of justice this time around. Overall, a marked improvement on the first movie, and as one who wildly resisted seeing this, I humbly shove my foot in my mouth.
*
I've also created a Tumblr account after having lurked around it darkest depths for several months now. I resisted the urge to sign up over there but I am apparently weak and now have a Tumblr of my own. Come follow me over there if you like: www.autumnatmidnite.tumblr.com (To read this review on mai Tumblr, click here)
So. By now, I'm certain most of you are scratching your heads in bewilderment. What is this review you speak of? Were you not, in your own words, mortified by those trailers and the high potential for character bashing and the selling of sex? Yes, yes and double yes. Although in the latter case, it's only fair I call out the BBC for potentially doing the same with ASiB. But we shall see. And for now, I'll refrain from making any judgements until that episode is actually out.
For the record, I sort of saw 'A Game of Shadows' by accident - long story, that. Anyway, there were indeed scenes that were grating to watch and had my inner Sherlockian rocking itself in the corner, spilling tears of embarrassment. RDJ's British accent is abysmal as ever. It doesn't even make an attempt at approaching the intellectual level or characterizations we are treated to with 'Sherlock'. There were more explosions than one might shake a rather large stick at, and far too much action/slo-mo for my tastes.
That aside, if I'm to be honest, despite my initial reservations, 'A Game of Shadows' not only outshined its predecessor, at its heart was more substance than I ever thought possible.
With the first installment, I found myself enjoying the movie... just not the portrayals. With any Holmes adaption, no matter how loosely based on ACD’s stories it may be, I need to be convinced what I’m seeing on screen are more than just pale intimations of Holmes and Watson. Guy Ritchie definitely had his work cut out for him on that front, but credit does need to be given where it’s due. He clearly took pains to correct much of what was broken in his '09 effort, from the little touches to the major issues regarding the disjointed feel to his directing. The modernity and steampunk elements have been toned down somewhat, and the fact that two completely different (and talented) writers had scripted this one was more glaringly obvious than the slash.
A tangible effort was made to improve upon its predecessor’s often abysmal representations of my favourite literary characters, particularly in regards to improvements made in cleaning up Holmes' intolerable slovenliness - though by no means does he display the "quiet primness of dress" Watson wrote him as having, he is slightly more of a conventionally dressed gentleman here. Slightly.
And while RDJ's Holmes is far from the "introspective and pallid dreamer of Baker Street", we begin to see performances that become entirely more recognizable. Holmes' intelligence has been dulled for the sake of comic relief, I am sad to say, but in this film it is done in a more tolerable - even endearing - manner. With the exception of that scene on the train with Holmes in drag, which I thought was degrading in the most puerile of ways, making him into a clown for the lowest forms of comic relief. It was a moment of buffonery that was painful to watch, turning the tables on the old Rathbone flicks and making Holmes into the imbecile so those around him appear more intelligent.
I also confess to despising Jude Law's Watson in the first film, for what I thought was an uncalled for level of hostility. But in the sequel, that razor edge to his character was blunted, and we we are given a Watson who is exasperated, yet lurking underneath was a palpable fondness not present in the first installment. I could believe that underneath it all was a friendship, and that honestly made all the difference in convincing me this was the man who would willingly follow Holmes to the ends of the earth. We are shown the camaraderie and affection between Holmes and Watson that existed in Doyle's stories, and understand how it hurt them both when the doctor marries Mary Morstan. Regardless of how you view their relationship, this did pain Holmes in Canon, and I've never seen that heartbreak rendered so beautifully and respectfully as it was here.
I was especially taken with Jared Harris' performance as Professor Moriarity, and the back story surrounding him has quickly become a favourite with me. He was quite convincing as an amoral intellect to rival the foremost mind of his time - when they clash, it is genuinely frightening, and the shivers come not because we think he's some volatile nutter, but because his decided lack of a conscience becomes a true counterweight to Holmes' sense of justice. Holmes of Canon was a flawed man (why we love him, honestly) but he was also a good man. He would have come to the same conclusions about humanity and the coming wars as Moriarity did in this film, but opposed them all the same. He is a worthy opponent, and we feel this throughout.
One part I was especially impressed by was the clever way in which they wove in that depiction of Moriarity’s empire of crime which Holmes describes in ‘The Final Problem’: “He sits motionless, like a spider in the centre of its web, but that web has a thousand radiations and he knows well every quiver of each of them.” I can easily see this being credible; Holmes keeping a map to track his rival’s movements, and those strings used as markers each forming a web with its radiations all leading to Moriarity. Either way, it immediately brought that Canon quote to mind, and made me just a bit giddy. And while nearly-but-not-quite on par with Doyle, the Holmes - Moriarity clash is made into a credible war of wits.
Here we come to the minor characters. Irene Adler was more chafing than wool underwear, completely unnecessary, and that’s all I’ll say to keep this spoiler free. The gypsy woman (Simza?) was by no means some Mary-Sue type love interest meant to draw attention away from the blatant homoeroticism, and her character remained relevant to the plot. I can’t say she was wonderful, as she was still only a minor character, but her inclusion was handled vastly better than I expected. Stephen Fry as Mycroft… I have mixed feelings about ‘Frycroft’, a name by which I shall, from this moment on, refer to him with fondness. He certainly wasn’t poorly cast and was more memorable than most in the role, but he brings no real nuance or feeling to it as does Mark Gatiss. I adore Stephen Fry, he looks the part, he is quite familiar with Canon and so gives us as faithful a portrayal as he could, given the way he was written in. Sebastian Moran was fleshed out to excellent effect, a menacing presence throughout. I'll even go so far as to say the BBC has their work cut out for them in matching the Moran we were given in this movie.
Mary Morstan. She’s a character that often doesn’t translate well from page to screen, but here she shined through as a woman with a backbone who remains tolerant of her husband’s partnership with Holmes. This Mary understands who always comes first in Watson’s life, and yet, she is entirely adept on her own, and we catch glimpses of what was alluded to of her in ‘The Sign of the Four’, what first attracted Watson to her.
On that note, though, just as in Canon, it’s not Mary who owns Watson’s heart. Very clearly, it’s Holmes, which brings me to what I might normally refer to as the subtext, though squinting or the use of slash goggles is rendered irrelevant here, because what took ‘AGOS’ to another level were the elements of romance, the genuine love story, blended in with all the deductions and adventure. To my immense surprise and relief, the homoeroticism was beautifully rendered, my breath literally catching when Holmes takes Watson’s hand - a scene that is a familiar one in Canon, but has taken Guy Ritchie of all directors to finally and unabashedly render onscreen - then later when the two waltz. Together. Holmes and Watson. Dancing. And there was nothing contrived or undignified about it, as I suspected there might be, having heard of that scene beforehand.
The not so subtly portrayed love had one other unexpected effect. It made RDJ’s performance reach its pinnacle. Where we had an obnoxiously clingy Holmes in the first movie, we now see a man disturbed by his unrequited feelings but who is entirely more selfless, the ending scene on the balcony proving this magnificently. All Holmes’ deductions, every possible way in which he has perceived the situation could go, logically, are cast to the wind when Watson steps into the picture, and without a single word being spoken, we see that devotion carried out in the ultimate act of love. It was gorgeous, and I was left speechless.
So for all my criticisms and the fact that this is more graphic novel than Canon, and while it doesn't even approach the loyalty as that of the BBC adaptation, it does do ACD's immortal characters a bit of justice this time around. Overall, a marked improvement on the first movie, and as one who wildly resisted seeing this, I humbly shove my foot in my mouth.
*