![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Saw Sherlock Holmes Christmas Eve at midnight—you know you're far too invested in a series when you skip Midnight Mass for it.
I do consider myself a Sherlockian. Four years ago the amount of detail I could quote to you about each of the tales, of the "world" of Victorian England, and of the characters' respective backgrounds would probably make you smile, nod, and back away slowly. I could argue how many wives Watson had (I throw down for 3), where his bullet wound was (I say he was kneeling down, and the bullet passed throw his shoulder, hitting him in the leg. THERE. PROBLEM OF CONTINUITY SOLVED.) I am a bit rusty now, but I can still hold my own in "The Game".
However, I've ALWAYS been one for the crackier aspects of Sherlock Holmes canon; like, Rex Stout's 1941 speech upon how Watson, was in fact, a woman, or how Sherlock Holmes was in actuality, a Vulcan ancestor of Mr. Spock, or just the simple notion that Watson DOESN'T HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED A RELIABLE NARRATOR.
SHOCKING, I know.
If you are a tried-and-true purist for the Canon, go back to your sitting room, curl up with your pipe and tantalus and pretend like this movie doesn't exist, because you will HATE IT. You will hate it with the fiery passion of a thousand fistfights at Reichenbach Falls.
If, however, you are like me—who love a good, energetic retelling by people who OBVIOUSLY know their canon well and yet want to gleefully play with it, muss up it's perfectly parted and slicked down hair and blow some shit up in the process--
Well, then, what's stopping you?
I think my years of being corrupted by fandom, there's a lot I've learned to forgive by way of characterization, as long as you make me fall in love with the characters and the setting. People claim RDJ's Holmes is NOT Holmes. But the more I think upon it, the more I think "Wait, wait; he is—in a fashion".
( Thoughts on RDJ's Holmes… )
The movie isn't perfect by any means—far too long, for one; it could have been compressed a bit. But the creation of Victorian London was to die for. I enjoyed the Macguffin, even though the villain was…well, I giggled more than I should have, probably. I think it was because he LOOKED more like a Sherlock Holmes than RDJ ever could.
I approve of the inclusions of Mary and Irene, though I feel that Mary, for all the smallness of her role, complimented the other roles better. Irene had a tinge of a feeling that she didn't quite belong, and perhaps rightly so. I did enjoy her criminal competency, however.
Words can not contain my love for Jude Law in his role as Watson. Spot On, Sir.
You know, people have the gall to claim that the problem with Watson in this movie was that he was too much of an equal to Holmes? Again, I think we've gotten snooty in how we view the characters. Watson was an intelligent, handsome doctor, who only looked dull-minded because he was standing next to Holmes. But in the stories, Holmes does acknowledge at times that Watson is using his intellect and Holmes' methods to good use. Watson may not be able to go theory-for-theory with Holmes--for who can truly keep up with that mind?--but he can hold his own, offer his own insights and experiences, and be side-by-side with Holmes as the solution is reached. Watson is not an equal to Holmes, but a perfect compliment. WHICH HE IS IN THIS MOVIE.
In Conclusion: Please sir, I'd like some more.
I do consider myself a Sherlockian. Four years ago the amount of detail I could quote to you about each of the tales, of the "world" of Victorian England, and of the characters' respective backgrounds would probably make you smile, nod, and back away slowly. I could argue how many wives Watson had (I throw down for 3), where his bullet wound was (I say he was kneeling down, and the bullet passed throw his shoulder, hitting him in the leg. THERE. PROBLEM OF CONTINUITY SOLVED.) I am a bit rusty now, but I can still hold my own in "The Game".
However, I've ALWAYS been one for the crackier aspects of Sherlock Holmes canon; like, Rex Stout's 1941 speech upon how Watson, was in fact, a woman, or how Sherlock Holmes was in actuality, a Vulcan ancestor of Mr. Spock, or just the simple notion that Watson DOESN'T HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED A RELIABLE NARRATOR.
SHOCKING, I know.
If you are a tried-and-true purist for the Canon, go back to your sitting room, curl up with your pipe and tantalus and pretend like this movie doesn't exist, because you will HATE IT. You will hate it with the fiery passion of a thousand fistfights at Reichenbach Falls.
If, however, you are like me—who love a good, energetic retelling by people who OBVIOUSLY know their canon well and yet want to gleefully play with it, muss up it's perfectly parted and slicked down hair and blow some shit up in the process--
Well, then, what's stopping you?
I think my years of being corrupted by fandom, there's a lot I've learned to forgive by way of characterization, as long as you make me fall in love with the characters and the setting. People claim RDJ's Holmes is NOT Holmes. But the more I think upon it, the more I think "Wait, wait; he is—in a fashion".
( Thoughts on RDJ's Holmes… )
The movie isn't perfect by any means—far too long, for one; it could have been compressed a bit. But the creation of Victorian London was to die for. I enjoyed the Macguffin, even though the villain was…well, I giggled more than I should have, probably. I think it was because he LOOKED more like a Sherlock Holmes than RDJ ever could.
I approve of the inclusions of Mary and Irene, though I feel that Mary, for all the smallness of her role, complimented the other roles better. Irene had a tinge of a feeling that she didn't quite belong, and perhaps rightly so. I did enjoy her criminal competency, however.
Words can not contain my love for Jude Law in his role as Watson. Spot On, Sir.
You know, people have the gall to claim that the problem with Watson in this movie was that he was too much of an equal to Holmes? Again, I think we've gotten snooty in how we view the characters. Watson was an intelligent, handsome doctor, who only looked dull-minded because he was standing next to Holmes. But in the stories, Holmes does acknowledge at times that Watson is using his intellect and Holmes' methods to good use. Watson may not be able to go theory-for-theory with Holmes--for who can truly keep up with that mind?--but he can hold his own, offer his own insights and experiences, and be side-by-side with Holmes as the solution is reached. Watson is not an equal to Holmes, but a perfect compliment. WHICH HE IS IN THIS MOVIE.
In Conclusion: Please sir, I'd like some more.
