PDA

View Full Version : Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows



DeleyanLee
07-20-2011, 08:56 PM
Just saw a trailer for the new Holmes movie. Anyone else seen any other trailers for this holiday season release?

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810163099/video/25942265

veinglory
07-20-2011, 09:09 PM
That is the only one I have seen.

JimmyB27
07-21-2011, 03:52 PM
Meh, when's the BBC's Sherlock coming back?

KTC
07-21-2011, 03:54 PM
I hated the first one SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much I left before it was over. My wife turned to look at me and said, "I can't take any more. Shoot me now." I said, "Shoot you? Nah...let's just use or feet. Let's be like bananas!!!!!!!!!!!"

Manuel Royal
07-21-2011, 04:08 PM
If you want to portray Moriarty, why would you not cast Bill Nighy, if it's at all possible?

I'd always be happiest with a close adaptation of the Doyle stories; loved the Jeremy Brett series.

But Holmes is an adaptable character, Downey is a charming actor, and I have to admit I got to like the first movie, and enjoy seeing a competent Watson who won't take unlimited amounts of bullshit from Holmes.

Diana Hignutt
07-21-2011, 04:34 PM
If you want to portray Moriarty, why would you not cast Bill Nighy, if it's at all possible?

I'd always be happiest with a close adaptation of the Doyle stories; loved the Jeremy Brett series.

But Holmes is an adaptable character, Downey is a charming actor, and I have to admit I got to like the first movie, and enjoy seeing a competent Watson who won't take unlimited amounts of bullshit from Holmes.

This. Brett was Holmes. Shit, back in the day, Basil Rathbone was Holmes.

I didn't care for the Downey Jr. one the first time, but it has grown on me on repeated watchings. Downey does a fine job, for this sort of Holmes.

But, pound for pound the Brett Hound of the Baskervilles was the best Holmes adaptation evah.

I'll watch this new one when it comes around on cable.

DeleyanLee
07-21-2011, 06:08 PM
Meh, when's the BBC's Sherlock coming back?

I'm not sure when it's airing, but my daughter's college friend watched them filming in London last week and got an autograph from Ben Cumberbatch (and lots of fuzzy videos on her phone). I'm wondering how they worked that with The Hobbit filming Down Under, but, hey, I'm happy. With luck, the next season will be in the USA by next spring. That would be nice. I'm seriously looking forward to it.

DeleyanLee
07-21-2011, 06:27 PM
If you want to portray Moriarty, why would you not cast Bill Nighy, if it's at all possible?

Maybe he wasn't available, or too expensive, or not interested. Hard for us to say, but that would be a fantastic casting, I agree.


But Holmes is an adaptable character, Downey is a charming actor, and I have to admit I got to like the first movie, and enjoy seeing a competent Watson who won't take unlimited amounts of bullshit from Holmes.

I wasn't inclined to like this reinterpretation of Holmes, honestly. I'm also seriously not a Downey fan (he's one of those actors I just plain don't like looking at for extended periods of time). But somehow the combination of Law's Watson (superb!) with Downey worked for me.

Now, the plot was inane and definitely beneath Holmes (I've read better plotted Holmes fan fic) and totally transparent and boring, but the relationship the two actors gave the characters made it interesting enough to sit through.

Because the last story was so bad, I'm still on the fence on whether or not I'll spend money on this one. Thus, my post looking for more information.


I'd always be happiest with a close adaptation of the Doyle stories; loved the Jeremy Brett series.


This. Brett was Holmes. Shit, back in the day, Basil Rathbone was Holmes.

But, pound for pound the Brett Hound of the Baskervilles was the best Holmes adaptation evah.

I'll watch this new one when it comes around on cable.

Agreed, Jeremy Brett is the epitome of Doyle's Holmes. The interesting thing about the new BBC series and this movie series is the reinterpretation of the iconic character, how they keep him the same but change him to a new vision.

Right now, I'm leaning toward cable for this one too, but if they can pull off a better story, I might be willing to pay money for it. I just have serious doubts.

Darkshore
07-21-2011, 08:07 PM
If you don't go into the first film comparing it to the original Holmes, It really stands on it's own. The film was good in my opinion, if you come at it without expectations.

SirOtter
07-21-2011, 08:47 PM
But, pound for pound the Brett Hound of the Baskervilles was the best Holmes adaptation evah.

Not even close. Frankly, its too languid pace bored me to tears. Give me Rathbone or Cushing, any time.

DeleyanLee
12-25-2011, 08:23 PM
Has anyone seen this yet, by chance?

I haven't heard anything about it yet--which seems odd.

Stlight
12-26-2011, 12:11 AM
Since everything I read about the first one was that you couldn't hear large parts of it I didn't watch it. It was on the free sample of cable last month, still didn't watch it. I find it annoying when I can't hear the actors. I'll wait to see if the sound is better in this one.

I've heard that in the fan screening of the new Batman, the universal complaint was that in parts of it you couldn't hear what the actors were saying. Apparently the producers are considering whether or not they should fix this problem. I hope this isn't a trend in movies. I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds it annoying to not be able to hear the actors.

MamaStrong
12-26-2011, 12:57 AM
Saw this the other day, and LOVED it! I'm a Downey fan anyway. However, it was great. Of course I've never read the books, but ehh, I liked it.

Sarashay
12-26-2011, 01:39 AM
Just saw it today! If you didn't like the first one, well, you'll be even more annoyed, so don't bother.

If you DID like the first one, as I did (I know it had its flaws, but I was too smitten with RDJ!Holmes to really give a damn) I'd warn you that it's not quite as good as the first one. Keep your expectations low, enjoy the banter and the pretty, and you'll have a blast.

Stlight
12-26-2011, 02:22 AM
But you can hear the banter in this one??? That makes all the difference to me.

MamaStrong
12-26-2011, 02:27 AM
I thought it was BETTER than the first one to be honest.

Stlight
12-26-2011, 03:29 AM
MamaStrong, so you can hear most of it? I'm not asking about the plot or the acting, if I can't understand what they're saying those things don't matter.

Yes, I want to read the words, "Yes, I could hear most of it" or "Nope, sound was as bad as the first one." before I spend money to see it.

Manuel Royal
12-26-2011, 05:47 AM
I was hoping they'd use this from Doyle, since it would be hard to improve:

This is not danger. It is inevitable destruction. You stand in the way not merely of an individual, but of a mighty organization, the full extent of which you, with all your cleverness, have been unable to realize. You must stand clear, Mr. Holmes, or be trodden under foot.

There were some odd little anachronisms in the movie (e.g., phonograph disks a few years ahead of time; a typewriter looking at least fifteen years too early for its design). I wonder if they were deliberate, as a sign not to take any of it too seriously.

My favorite cinematic Holmes interpretations are probably those of Christopher Plummer and John Neville (both, oddly enough, in movies pitting Holmes against Jack the Ripper).

veinglory
12-26-2011, 06:40 AM
I thought it was great fun but the anachronisms were rampant and it played fast and loose with canon. It is more a fanfic movie really.

bethany
12-26-2011, 06:40 AM
I loved it. Loved the first one, loved this one.

IceCreamEmpress
12-26-2011, 06:50 AM
I loved it, and so did my Largely Mythological Husband. I have no idea why the reviews haven't been better--I think it was just as crisp and well-paced as the first.

Also, Stephen Fry as Mycroft. Perfection!

Scribhneoir
12-26-2011, 06:59 AM
Yes, I want to read the words, "Yes, I could hear most of it" or "Nope, sound was as bad as the first one." before I spend money to see it.

Yes, I could hear every word of every bit of dialogue. No sound issues at all.

I thought it was a fun movie. Didn't see the first one, though, so I can't compare them for either story or sound.

jerriecan
12-26-2011, 11:03 PM
A very fun movie, and Jared Harris as Moriarty was a perfect foil for Holmes. Not the casting I'd have expected for a major Hollywood villain, but perfect for this film. And I agree about Stephen Fry - his scenes were easily among the best in the film.

MamaStrong
12-27-2011, 07:06 AM
Yes, I could hear every word of every bit of dialogue. No sound issues at all.

I thought it was a fun movie. Didn't see the first one, though, so I can't compare them for either story or sound.

I second this!

Toothpaste
12-27-2011, 09:42 AM
Actually I did think they mumbled a fair bit, could understand most of it though.

And I didn't like it as much as the first. The way both the dialogue and the plot were delivered I expected them to be both far more clever than they actually were. But the casting again was great, and it's still an entertaining movie. I still prefer the first.

defcon6000
12-27-2011, 11:07 AM
Didn't see the first one, but saw this with the family and enjoyed it. My niggle though was those atrocious slow-mo action sequences. I can't stand them. And I don't see what they add to the movie, either. An action scene that should be over within 5 minutes, is stretched out to an agonizing 20 minutes.

blacbird
12-27-2011, 11:23 AM
Brett was Holmes. Shit, back in the day, Basil Rathbone was Holmes.


This, exactly. I like Downey as an actor, and even moderately enjoyed the first film, as a fluffy fantasy, with the understanding from the outset that it wasn't really going to be "Sherlock Holmes". I might even watch this sequel, in the same frame of mind.

But don't go to it if you have any expectation of seeing Conan Doyle's immortal character re-created. If you haven't read any of the original Sherlock Holmes tales, you've shortchanged yourself. Go read some.

Now, I'll recommend also the movie Murder by Decree, made thirty-plus years ago, and from a non-Conan Doyle story thoroughly debunked, but still an excellent atmospheric adaptation of the Holmes mythology, with Christopher Plummer as Holmes and David Wayne as Watson. Hard to find, for some unfathomable reason, but very worth your time.

caw

veinglory
12-27-2011, 07:00 PM
I think the ongoing action sequence thing was kind of important to set up the ending--but I do wish they'd left off the last 3-4 minutes of the movie.

Manuel Royal
12-27-2011, 07:35 PM
Now, I'll recommend also the movie Murder by Decree, made thirty-plus years ago, and from a non-Conan Doyle story thoroughly debunked, but still an excellent atmospheric adaptation of the Holmes mythology, with Christopher Plummer as Holmes and David Wayne as Watson. Hard to find, for some unfathomable reason, but very worth your time.

cawWasn't that James Mason as Watson in Murder by Decree?

The other movie pitting Holmes against the Ripper is A Study in Terror, with John Neville (whom you may remember as Baron Munschausen). Both movies did have a notable, competent Watson, which is good.

(The worst thing about the Basil Rathbone movies is Watson as a roly-poly halfwit.)

ETA: I enjoyed Stephen Frye as Mycroft. Somehow, being a seemingly oblivious nudist at home seems a believable eccentricity for him.

Stlight
12-28-2011, 12:41 AM
Scribhneoir, MamaStrong and Toothpaste, thanks. I find I enjoy movies more when I can hear the actors than when I can't.

veinglory
12-28-2011, 12:44 AM
I didn't have that issue with either SH movies, perhaps it relates to the theatre?

Max Vaehling
12-28-2011, 01:45 AM
Just back from the cinema. Liked it better than the first, but any movie that doesn't have a chase sequence start in the London sewers and end up on top of the Tower Bridge without any hint of anybody climbing will do that for me.

That said, I still tink Moffat's Sherlock is a better (truer) adaptation.

And while I enjoyed Fry's nude scene, it didn't really add anything to the plot, did it?

Toothpaste
12-28-2011, 01:48 AM
No, it wasn't the theatre, it was the "oh so British" being witty and speaking quickly while expressing complicated thoughts that I found at times unintelligible, and now that I think about it, it was really only Downey Jr who suffered from that problem. Occasionally Law. But the rest were pretty clear. I did miss some of what Holmes was saying though, if I'm being honest, and I think my hearing and comprehension levels are rather strong :) . (also, I have seen my fair share of quick British wit, and farces etc, so I know how to listen to them - I truly think in Downey's attempt to sound British and witty he sometimes doesn't articulate as well as his fellow cast members. Fry was totally understandable, for example.)

ETA: Max - Why does being nude have to add to the plot? It was a fun character choice, that said a lot about who the man was, and at the same time, the scene itself was necessary as far as the telegram goes and seeing Mrs. Watson safe and sound.

readitnweep
07-06-2012, 09:36 AM
I'm a fan of the books, and I loved this and the first SH film RDJ was in due to the characterizations; it was the first time I felt like anyone got Holmes and Watson right - warts and all. I've never been a fan of the more polished Holmes teamed with a bumbling Watson. Never made sense to me.

I enjoyed the first Guy Ritchie version very much. This one not as much - I found the plot weaker and it was a bit over the top for me at times. Still, I enjoyed it, just not as much.

Obviously, they're leading up to doing a third with Irene's seemingly non-death and the cliffie-that-wasn't (which made for an odd last three minutes of this film). I will be going to the third to see what they do there. Kudos to the acting and directing here.

Diana Hignutt
07-06-2012, 02:57 PM
I'm a fan of the books, and I loved this and the first SH film RDJ was in due to the characterizations; it was the first time I felt like anyone got Holmes and Watson right - warts and all. I've never been a fan of the more polished Holmes teamed with a bumbling Watson. Never made sense to me.

I enjoyed the first Guy Ritchie version very much. This one not as much - I found the plot weaker and it was a bit over the top for me at times. Still, I enjoyed it, just not as much.

Obviously, they're leading up to doing a third with Irene's seemingly non-death and the cliffie-that-wasn't (which made for an odd last three minutes of this film). I will be going to the third to see what they do there. Kudos to the acting and directing here.

I think they really did kill Irene Adler. We were dealing with Prof. James Moriarty after all.

The305itself
09-15-2012, 01:43 AM
The first one was amazing to me becauseI was expecting a boring detective movie, but it really tossed me around in their action and adventure and I was amazed. The second one was good, but I knew what to expect this time.