Welcome to my blog - a scrapbook of memories, ideas and inspirations.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Ritchie's Holmes is elementary

I am a fan of Guy Ritchie and thoroughly enjoyed watching his new Sherlock Holmes film.  Ritchie is surprisingly talented in capturing the outlandish nature of reality in which his characters dwell. 


Of course, his portrayal of Sherlock Holmes is different from the iconic image painted by Conan Doyle, which we have all grown to associate with our beloved private detective.

The new Homes

Sherlock Holmes as we knew him is replaced with an action hero, whose lack of fear is infectious.  Richie’s Holmes is different from the slow, calculating Sherlock we are used to. He is faster, coarser, better looking and more likeable that the traditional Sherlock. Don’t get me wrong, I love reading Conan Doyle, but I prefer watching Robert Downey, Jr. 



Ritchie’s Holmes is detached from the world and is kind of like Batman, who comes to the rescue when summoned, but otherwise lives in his own world of chemical experiments and heavy drug use.

The new Watson

Ritchie’s Watson is not a naïve timid doctor, but somewhat of a super hero, who is quick at combat. I am not crazy about the choice of Jude Law as this Watson.  He makes a clumsy hybrid of a doctor/war hero and he is not rugged enough for this role. I think Daniel Craig would have made a better fit. Jude Law is a pretty boy. I prefer watching him in films like AI, Alfie and Closer.



Other characters

All other characters are unimportant, although Rachel McAdams makes nice splashes of color with her scarlet dress and gorgeous face. 


 The plot

This is an action film made by Ritchie, which means that the plot is  not important. Basically, you are just going to see Holmes and Watson, dressed in warm sepia and grey, running around dirty streets of London, bickering like lovers, and fighting an underground war of corruption.  Trust me, the film is filled with enough energy, imagery, and grungy lingo to make you forget that its plot is floating Up in the Air (sorry had to stick that in.)  


Setting

Not unlike the Batman films, Ritchie’s creation is set against the backdrops of soiled, grimy, post apocalyptically gritty city.  The streets of London do not seem Victorian, but rather look like random alleys behind old abandoned warehouses.  With the exception of a few colorful scenes involving Rachel McAdams, the film appears almost monotone brown and blue. 
Costumes

Costumes in this film are the only clue to the Victorian time period.  They are very well chosen and kept simple, elegant and functional. No fluff, no adornment, pure comfort and practicality in the event of combat, which takes place every couple of minutes.

Action

Boxing, explosions, and fist fights are only interrupted by a slow motion display of a fight that is about to take place.  The final fight, on the Tower Bridge was well choreographed. After running all over London, Holmes finally comes face to face with the main antagonist and reacts to the danger with calculated dignity. Filmed on a partially built Tower Bridge, 200 feet up in the air, this fight makes for a spectacular ending. (It was actuality filmed 30 feet up, in front of a green screen.)

Soundtrack

The soundtrack of this film is also rugged and extremely noisy, but not in a bad way. I enjoyed the random medley of fiddle, explosions and metal grinding sounds. The main score sounds a little off key, like a tango on acid, with a mix of polka. Its gypsy, pirate like sounds are fitting for the new Holmes, who is a bit weird himself. 

Conclusion

This film took me into another dimension, a parallel reality of sorts, where Holmes is deducing the mystery under the influence of unknown substances. It reminded me of the Blade Runner with its industrial apocalyptic looking scenes.  It is appealing in a sullen way an Irish pub brawl would appeal to an unsuspecting spectator.

Overall, the film is well worth watching for anyone who likes action films without a well woven plot and does not expect to hear phrases  like “It’s elementary, Watson.”

No comments:

Post a Comment