Subscribe to Christianity Today
Subscribe to Christianity Today
Donate to Christianity Today
login | my account
February 12, 2012

Home > Movies > Reviews > 2009
Sherlock Holmes
Though this adaptation is sometimes incoherent, it’s nonetheless quirky, intelligent, action-packed, and lots of fun, thanks in large part to Robert Downey Jr.’s portrayal.






Sherlock Holmes

Our rating: 3½ Stars - Good Your rating:


Your Comments: see all

MPAA rating: PG-13
(for intense sequences of violence and action, some startling images and a scene of suggestive material)

Genre: Adventure, Mystery

Theater release:
December 25, 2009
by Warner Brothers Pictures

Directed by: Guy Ritchie

Runtime: 2 hours 8 minutes

Cast: Robert Downey Jr. (Sherlock Holmes), Jude Law (Dr. John Watson), Rachel McAdams (Irene Adler), Mark Strong (Lord Blackwood), Eddie Marsan (Inspector Lestrade), Kelly Reilly (Mary Marstan), James Fox (Sir Thomas), Geraldine James (Mrs. Hudson)

Related:
Talk About It/Family Corner


This is definitely not your father's version of Sherlock Holmes … or your grandfather's, for that matter.

The intensity and action of the opening ten minutes make that perfectly clear. Gone are Holmes' deerstalker hat and the stoic, reserved demeanor. Instead, we see the world's most famous detective racing through the dark streets in comparatively disheveled attire before engaging in some serious brawling action to apprehend the murderous occultist Lord Blackwood.

Would it surprise you to learn that this new Sherlock Holmes is just as true to the original stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle as any Basil Rathbone version, if not more so?

Holmes could be viewed as the late 19th century equivalent of a comic book superhero. His legendary deductive reasoning, his superb scientific skills, his gift for disguise, and his experience in martial arts and bare-knuckled street-fighting are all part of this status—and they're straight from Doyle's writings and all are faithfully depicted here. It's the energy behind the storytelling that's changed.

Robert Downey Jr. as Sherlock Holmes
Robert Downey Jr. as Sherlock Holmes

During the film, I thought that Holmes shares much in common with Batman—they even both have utility belts. And if the Dark Knight can survive different interpretations over his 70 years of comic book history, then why not a slightly different but still faithful take on Holmes after 120 years?

As for Robert Downey Jr.'s look as Holmes, Doyle describes him as "eccentric" and "bohemian"—both perfectly describe this new portrayal. In one scene, Holmes seems to use a hallucinatory drug to gain insight into his enemy's plan—also consistent with Doyle's depiction.

Watson here also differs from his traditional Hollywood portrayal. Doyle's stories never depicted him as the portly, befuddled sidekick; he's originally described as a veteran of the Afghan war, thin, strong, and packing a revolver. Yes, he's a foil to Holmes' intellect, but more as an intelligent everyman for the detective to play off, not merely for comic relief. (Interestingly, their relationship closely resembles that of House and Wilson on TV's House, and of course, the medical mystery program was originally modeled on Holmes and Watson.)

Other familiar details are still present here: the flat at No. 221b Baker Street, landlady Mrs. Hudson, Watson's soon-to-be wife Mary Marstan, Inspector Lestrade of the Scotland Yard, and even Irene Adler, the beautiful and mysterious woman who bested Holmes and stole his heart in one classic short story. Really, the only significant unfamiliar character in this movie is the aforementioned Lord Blackwood, ironic considering how quickly the movie dives into the story, as if Holmes has a long history with his nemesis.

Jude Law as Dr. John Watson
Jude Law as Dr. John Watson

Nevertheless, Blackwood is caught and sentenced to death, but before his execution, the satanic serial killer foretells of his resurrection to Holmes and promises more murders. Blackwood is hanged and Watson confirms his death, yet sure enough, days later, Blackwood's tomb is open, his body is gone, and suspects connected to him begin die. Can Holmes explain the resurrection, or is there really something supernatural at work? And is it all somehow connected to the mysterious reappearance of Irene Adler in London?

Contrary to the trailers' depiction, Holmes is not all action. There is indeed a mystery at the heart of it—a good one, not a great one—involving Blackwood's obsession with the dark arts and a shadowy conspiracy. There's also plenty of British humor—some dry, some silly—along with some scenes of heart in the bond between Holmes and Watson, their friendship seemingly threatened by the intrusion of Watson's fiancée Mary.

The film's greatest strength is Downey's performance. His natural charm and charisma is perfectly matched here in a role that demands intelligence, physicality, and a measure of quirkiness. Some of Downey's mannerisms and facial expressions are a hoot, but rest assured, he inhabits this role perfectly.

Director Guy Ritchie and the screenwriters also deserve credit, most notably for how they've visualized the detective's thinking. Though overplayed, it's cool to see Holmes "flash-forward" his punches in a brawl, much like a chess player anticipates his upcoming moves. There are also scenes where the camera darts about the room, showing us the details that Holmes notices. Sometimes we keep up, but more often we're behind, as it should be—after all, we should never be a step ahead of Holmes, right? Similarly, there's a fun bit that demonstrates how Holmes quickly improvises a disguise to gain information.




Christianity Today


  


Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.


Click here for international orders2-for-1 Gifts!
[Reader Reviews]

Displaying 1–3 of 26 comments

Sam B

December 03, 2010  6:49pm

I completely disagree with the previous comments. This movie is about how science can be used for both good and evil. In fact, the evil 'occultism' isn't even occultism -- it's a man who takes advantage of the masses ignorance of chemistry and biology to gain power, and through their fear of 'black magic' he does so until he is found out. The use of the 'ritual' isn't even for magical purposes; it's used to feed people's fear and give the impression of magical power. As for the 'constant slap in the face of Christians' I also highly disagree with -- the entire point of the usage of Christian themes and motifs is to point out that the masses, religious or not, have fear of the unknown and mystical things, which results in people believe that the man preforming supposed 'black magic' actually has power. This movie is a wonderful lesson in the importance of seeking the truth of a matter, not just believing in what you see.

Report Abuse

S Day

May 09, 2010  6:22am

I agree with Frank Habi. This review is from a cinematography perspective. I could care less. I am a Christian, and that is why I come to this site. I was deeply offended that I had to watch witchcraft and the occult in my home. Like other occultic phenomena, it can hurt you later. Why would I want myself or my middle schooler to see this film, true to the book or not. The traditional Holmes and Watson were cleaned up apparently because they were portrayed in an age when people worried about their families, and inspiration was more of a goal in movies as opposed to the age we live in.

S Day

May 09, 2010  6:20am

I agree with Frank Habi. This review is from a cinematography perspective. I could care less. I am a Christian, and that is why I come to this site. I was deeply offended that I had to watch witchcraft and the occult in my home. Like other occultic phenomena, it can hurt you later. Why would I want myself or my middle schooler to see this film, true to the book or not. The traditional Holmes and Watson were cleaned up apparently because they were portrayed in an age when people worried about their families, and inspiration was more of a goal in movies as opposed to the age we live in.

The allotted time for commenting has ended.

[Browse More Christianity Today]



Search
Search




Search
Scripture Search
Go Deeper

Books & Culture
Christianity Today
Church Law & Tax Report
Church Finance Today
Leadership Journal
Men of Integrity
Kyria.com
ChristianityTodayLibrary.com
PreachingToday.com