A Study in Dread: Sherlock Holmes (2009)

Sherlock Holmes (2009)

Trailer at bottom.

I love Sherlock Holmes. I mean truly love. The Conan Doyle Canon of Holmes stories were the first non-kids books that I read as a kid. I’ve re-read the 60 Holmes stories fully at least 7-8 times and have read a story or two here and there countless others. I’ve seen the majority of movies and TV series dealing with Holmes either directly or indirectly (like the excellent Murder Rooms) and have a collection of radio plays and dramas. I don’t know that I would put myself at the level of a Sherlockian Society member, but perhaps I’m about as close as a lay person can get.

There is a consuming sense of dread deep in the pit of my stomach regarding the Sherlock Holmes as envisioned by Guy Ritchie. Many fans of Holmes I am sure feel this way, but I would like to put down exactly why I feel the way I do so maybe the not-as-initiated can understand the trepidation experienced by those who ‘get’ Holmes.

Yuk! Girls!

The first red flag of any Holmes pastiche is the inclusion of Irene Adler. Adler was directly involved in one Original Canon (OC) story and was barely referenced in three others. That’s it. Holmes was not obsessed with Adler; Holmes only thought of Adler as a worthy opponent – indeed the only opponent in the OC that beat Holmes; There was no secret crush, no infatuation, no wistful belly-aching.

Holmes was very Zen regarding emotions. Attachments and emotion got in the way of pure reasoning, hence he had no use for it. To quote the man himself:

“It is of the first importance,” he said, “not to allow your judgment to be biased by personal qualities. A client is to me a mere unit, — a factor in a problem. The emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning. I assure you that the most winning woman I ever knew was hanged for poisoning three little children for their insurance-money, and the most repellant man of my acquaintance is a philanthropist who has spent nearly a quarter of a million upon the London poor.”

Holmes had no care for women other than how they were involved in the chain of reasoning to a problem. He considered them the weaker sex, was very gender-biased, and Adler was the one exception. End of story.

I am assuming that Adler will somehow be mis-used in the story. I think it is safe assumption because, frankly, the only way to use Adler is to mis-use her. She simply has no place in a Holmes narrative. I’m betting on a love interest angle, but even if not, it is an un-needed complication and distraction.

Holmes. Sherlock Holmes.

Based on the trailers for the upcoming movie, “Sherlock Holmes” appears to be more of a Victorian era James Bond or Jason Bourne than anything resembling Sherlock Holmes. Gadgets, explosions, physical humor, and – inexplicably – some type of fight club seem to haunt every piece of footage released regarding this movie.

I’m not sure how many great explosions there were in London in the mid to late 1800s, but I am guessing that there were less than the amount shown just in the trailer for “Sherlock Holmes.” Dr. No type villains with an arsenal of nuclear weapons did not exist in Victorian times England. This seems to be a case of villain absurdity nearing Wild Wild West proportions if the released scenes are any indication.

Holmes regularly made use of disguise and outright cleverness (the ubiquitous pushing paper under a door and poking through the keyhole so key on the other side falls out to land on the paper before pulling it back, for example, was first envisioned by Doyle in a Holmes story), but he never had designed gadgets on his person. He was more like MacGuyver’s daddy. A Holmes loaded down with an overcoat full of gadgets is just plain silly.

Finally, what’s with the fight club? Holmes was an expert in Bartitsu which is an English devised martial art incorporating jujutsu, pugilism, and cane fighting. He used it in the course of his cases when needed (like to defeat Moriarty at The Falls). He used a seven per-cent solution of cocaine when his mind needed stimulation. These facts are inarguable. Making Holmes some sort of fight-addicted dipshit of the “Fight Club” fan disposition might be the ultimate injustice to the character.

The Sign of Four

Four writers that is. Michael Robert Johnson, Anthony Peckham, Simon Kinberg, and Lionel Wigram are all credited as writers for “Sherlock Holmes.” Four writers seem an awful lot to me. Looking quickly at the top five box office for the week ending 10/23, I see none with more than two screen-writers. Three of the four that are credited on “Sherlock Holmes” have no previous screenwriting experience. The fourth, Simon Kinberg, has a fair amount of experience with such movies as xXx: State of the Union, X-Men: Last Stand, and Jumper. Oh boy.

Guy Ritchie

No comments needed.

K.I.S.S. (Keep it Sherlock Stupid)

One of the reasons that Sherlock Holmes is the most popular creation in fiction and has endured for 115 years is because of his idiosyncrasies.  He is the original consulting detective; a logical deduction machine addicted to cocaine with only one real friend; he is incapable of passion while showing great compassion.  He plays violin; is a volatile chemist and scientist; has a droll sense of humor; smokes a pipe; wears not a deerstalker; and foils bad guys.

That is who Sherlock Holmes is.  Take any one of those things away and Sherlock Holmes is not longer the singular enigmatic character that has survived for over a century.  He becomes commonplace; a cliche of 20th Century fiction.  Why would anyone want to do that when trying to create a franchisable character?

Sundry

• I guess it is only fitting that Holmes is from New York if Batman is from Wales.
• I would have rather seen Downey’s Watson, Jude Law, as Holmes.
• I’ve heard a rumor that the Ritchie movie might include a nod in the direction of Holmes and Watson being gay. I’m not offended by the portrayal of homosexuals, but it remains completely untrue to the OC for all the same reasons that an Adler romance is wrong. Additionally, Watson was married – probably twice.
• Brad Pitt is rumored to make a cameo as Moriarty. I like Pitt. He is not an actor who I see as a Moriarty-type though. Moriarty is overdone in Holmes pastiches as well, but if used right could be effective. There should be little (or possibly no) actual confrontation until near the end of the franchise. Holmes was always the dog chasing Moriarty’s bone. Fleeting glimpses of Moriarty as the spider in his web would be sufficient and true to the OC.

Recommendations

As approved by me.

• The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes BBC/Granada Television The great English character actor Jermy Brett shows that sometimes presence is more important than physical similarity. Brett’s Holmes in this series is the only one to send shivers down my spine. This is Holmes. The slight humor, the affection for Watson, the haughty and intimidating nature. It all works.
• The Seven Pre-Cent Solution Holmes and Sigmund Freud. This movie is full of a bunch of psycho-babble nonsense, but it is in the spirit of complete originality with little attachment to the OC. If one is going to deviate so far from the OC, this is the right way to do it. the movie sis mostly good fun and Holmes retains his wits despite the alternate ‘origin story.’
• Murder Rooms BBC TV Conan Doyle as a young resident doctor taken under the wing of the illustrious but distrusted Dr. Joseph Bell. There is some truth that the real Dr. Bell was part of the inspiration for Sherlock Holmes and in this series that is played up wonderfully as Doyle takes on he role of Bell’s Watson. Many circumstances from Doyle’s later Holmes stories surface in this extremely well done BBC series.
• The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes A bizarre movie written and directed by Billy Wilder. There are moments of humor and action – but through it all Holmes (Robert Stephens) is true to form. Holmes, his brother Mycroft (Christopher Lee), and Dr. Watson take on a case that puts them up against Ol’ Nessie and dwarves while not butchering the OC. What’s not to like?
• Young Sherlock Holmes Released almost 24 years to the day before the above deconstructed Guy Ritchie movie, “Young Sherlock Holmes” is not nearly as ridiculous as it sounds. Although writer Chris Columbus (Harry Potter 1 &2) and director Barry Levinson take great liberty with the OC, they do it way back to the hypothetical beginning and re-write the start of the Holmes & Watson team. What if Holmes and Watson initially met at a private boarding school – of course as roommates? And if Holmes had a mischievous sense of humor, amazing deductive abilities, and a soft spot for a pretty girl? Could that Holmes become the serious logical machine that we know from the OC? Give this movie and its Sherlock Holmes and the Temple of Doom style of action a try.

Similar Posts:

• Sherlock Holmes (2009)
• [Trailer] The Asylum’s “Sherlock Holmes” (2010)
• More Love For Kick-Ass (2010)
• [DVD] Lymelife (2009)
• Mystery Team (2010)

Popularity: 1% [?]