Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Sherlock Holmes (2009) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
The stories of master detective Sherlock Holmes have delighted readers, listeners, and viewers for well over a century. The tales have grown from the stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to include radio, television, and film. Director Guy Ritchie casts Robert Downey Jr. as a slightly dysfunctional but brilliant Holmes who, along with his partner Dr. Watson (Jude Law), have just stopped a bizarre ceremony and ended a murder spree in the process.
The people of London are grateful to be free of the terror induced by Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), but solving the mystery leaves Holmes somewhat despondent and uninterested in solving other mysteries. Most likely because Watson is moving out of their home and office to complete his pending marriage plans. The lack of complexity in the cases Holmes is requested to take leaves him abundant time to sulk in his study and scare the housing staff with his bizarre behavior and inventions.
The monotony of Holmes’s life is abruptly ended when Blackwood summons him shortly before his scheduled execution for his crimes. Blackwood indicates that a dark plot is in the works and though his claims are dismissed by the authorities as the desperate ravings of a madman about to be executed, Holmes begins to think there is more to the case than meets the eye. Things take a bizarre turn when Blackwood appears to rise from the dead and starts a new wave of terror over the city. Pressed into action, Holmes and Watson uncover a series of clues that reveal a diabolic plot that will alter the balance of power in England.
In a race against time, Holmes and Watson must also deal with their unresolved issues regarding Watson’s pending marriage as well as a mysterious, seductive woman from Holmes’s past (Rachel Mc Adams). What follows is a winning combination of comedy, action, mystery, and a touch of romance Ritchie knows he has a strong cast and gives Downey, Law, and Mc Adams ample room to explore their characters yet keeps them within the story.
The plot of the film may be the weakest point and at times its uncertain if it is an action buddy film or a caper picture. It attempts to blend the two but often comes up short, lacking enough action for my taste. The plot may also be confusing to some as it lacks a cohesive structure and seems to be a free roaming entity that exists within a general framework.
Downey and Law work well with one another and Downey gives a strong, clever performance in a role that requires both physical and cerebral dexterity. Mc Adams is good as the love interest in the film but would have benefited from more time to better expand her character which I hope will happen in future films.
While the film may not come across as a traditional American studio film, there is a lot to like about this new Holmes and the new franchise it launches for fans old and new.
The people of London are grateful to be free of the terror induced by Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), but solving the mystery leaves Holmes somewhat despondent and uninterested in solving other mysteries. Most likely because Watson is moving out of their home and office to complete his pending marriage plans. The lack of complexity in the cases Holmes is requested to take leaves him abundant time to sulk in his study and scare the housing staff with his bizarre behavior and inventions.
The monotony of Holmes’s life is abruptly ended when Blackwood summons him shortly before his scheduled execution for his crimes. Blackwood indicates that a dark plot is in the works and though his claims are dismissed by the authorities as the desperate ravings of a madman about to be executed, Holmes begins to think there is more to the case than meets the eye. Things take a bizarre turn when Blackwood appears to rise from the dead and starts a new wave of terror over the city. Pressed into action, Holmes and Watson uncover a series of clues that reveal a diabolic plot that will alter the balance of power in England.
In a race against time, Holmes and Watson must also deal with their unresolved issues regarding Watson’s pending marriage as well as a mysterious, seductive woman from Holmes’s past (Rachel Mc Adams). What follows is a winning combination of comedy, action, mystery, and a touch of romance Ritchie knows he has a strong cast and gives Downey, Law, and Mc Adams ample room to explore their characters yet keeps them within the story.
The plot of the film may be the weakest point and at times its uncertain if it is an action buddy film or a caper picture. It attempts to blend the two but often comes up short, lacking enough action for my taste. The plot may also be confusing to some as it lacks a cohesive structure and seems to be a free roaming entity that exists within a general framework.
Downey and Law work well with one another and Downey gives a strong, clever performance in a role that requires both physical and cerebral dexterity. Mc Adams is good as the love interest in the film but would have benefited from more time to better expand her character which I hope will happen in future films.
While the film may not come across as a traditional American studio film, there is a lot to like about this new Holmes and the new franchise it launches for fans old and new.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Enola Holmes (2020) in Movies
Oct 3, 2020
There were several things that didn't make me leap at this one, but I was excited to have a "new release" to watch so...
The Holmes family name is a recognisable one, Sherlock and Mycroft are taking London by storm... but did you know about their younger sister, Enola? Raised by her mother, an eccentric and strong woman with a very alternative view on education, Enola is a strong will young woman in her image. When her mother goes missing Enola sets off to find her against the wishes of her brothers, taking herself to London and crossing paths with friends and foes along the way.
When I was looking for something between Sherlock Holmes and Nancy Drew I was hoping they'd throw the stone a little further. In my notes I scribbled that there are plenty of books about teen detectives that would have adapted well... and then I discovered that this was a book, and a series no less. I understand that the association with Sherlock Holmes is a strong one to market, but I feel like we're a little Sherlocked out these days. I miss vaguely original content... sorry, that sounds bitchier than it was meant to be.
Millie Bobby Brown did a good job of bringing Enola to life, there's a strong precocious nature to the role and she adapted to every twist convincingly. At times I noticed the odd slip that felt a little pantomime-y but by the time I'd pursed my lips and frowned it had already passed.
The Holmes brothers, brought to us by Henry Cavill and Sam Claflin, where to start... Claflin as Mycroft did a pretty good job, possibly too good, every time he was on screen I wanted him to leave. However, am I the only one that thought that these actors should have been playing each other's roles? As much as I love Cavill, he is not Sherlock. Sherlock is not suave and naturally charming, and he's certainly not built like a Chippendale, well, maybe a bit of furniture. It felt like a very unnatural fit, but I could just about visualise it with the roles reversed.
Supporting actors were great, I particularly enjoyed Susan Wokoma's, Edith. But, I was pleasantly surprised to see Fiona Shaw pop up in what appeared to be a reprisal of her role from Three Men and a Little Lady, but I digress.
To a layman like myself the period setting looked amazing and I thought the costumes were excellent. In fact, everything about the film looked stunning, but here is where I part with compliments.
Enola Holmes clocks in at just over the 2 hour mark, 2 hours and 3 minutes if we're being precise. If you say "family film" I think 1 hour 30, 45 maybe, if you say "thriller" I think 2 hours+... I know there are no hard and fast rules about it, but here's the thing, there wasn't enough content to fill that time. Yes, they managed to fill the runtime, but so much of it was unnecessary. Her mother's storyline seemed entirely there to get her to London, which could easily have been done in several ways, there's one scene in particular that seemed to go nowhere. I hate to say it, but Fiona Shaw and her finishing school were completely surplus to requirements too, nothing happened there that was very relevant at all. Some of the additions to what is quite a simple story made it a little complicated, though complicated isn't quite the right word because everything was easy to grasp (when it was relevant), perhaps "fussy" would be a better choice.
When the film ended I knew we were being set up for round 2, though this one came with less of a sickening groan than Artemis Fowl's did. I don't know how the books run as a series so I'd be interested to see how they compare, but I'm not a fan of continued storyline and that will definitely be on the cards for a sequel.
While I'm fully aware I've just moaned about a lot of points, the film is definitely watchable, but for me it was too cluttered and drawn out to hold my attention. With some snipping here and there it could have been vastly improved.
(My god, I didn't even mention the 4th wall breaking or the very end... but I guess no one really wants a full essay on the subject.)
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/10/enola-holmes-movie-review.html
The Holmes family name is a recognisable one, Sherlock and Mycroft are taking London by storm... but did you know about their younger sister, Enola? Raised by her mother, an eccentric and strong woman with a very alternative view on education, Enola is a strong will young woman in her image. When her mother goes missing Enola sets off to find her against the wishes of her brothers, taking herself to London and crossing paths with friends and foes along the way.
When I was looking for something between Sherlock Holmes and Nancy Drew I was hoping they'd throw the stone a little further. In my notes I scribbled that there are plenty of books about teen detectives that would have adapted well... and then I discovered that this was a book, and a series no less. I understand that the association with Sherlock Holmes is a strong one to market, but I feel like we're a little Sherlocked out these days. I miss vaguely original content... sorry, that sounds bitchier than it was meant to be.
Millie Bobby Brown did a good job of bringing Enola to life, there's a strong precocious nature to the role and she adapted to every twist convincingly. At times I noticed the odd slip that felt a little pantomime-y but by the time I'd pursed my lips and frowned it had already passed.
The Holmes brothers, brought to us by Henry Cavill and Sam Claflin, where to start... Claflin as Mycroft did a pretty good job, possibly too good, every time he was on screen I wanted him to leave. However, am I the only one that thought that these actors should have been playing each other's roles? As much as I love Cavill, he is not Sherlock. Sherlock is not suave and naturally charming, and he's certainly not built like a Chippendale, well, maybe a bit of furniture. It felt like a very unnatural fit, but I could just about visualise it with the roles reversed.
Supporting actors were great, I particularly enjoyed Susan Wokoma's, Edith. But, I was pleasantly surprised to see Fiona Shaw pop up in what appeared to be a reprisal of her role from Three Men and a Little Lady, but I digress.
To a layman like myself the period setting looked amazing and I thought the costumes were excellent. In fact, everything about the film looked stunning, but here is where I part with compliments.
Enola Holmes clocks in at just over the 2 hour mark, 2 hours and 3 minutes if we're being precise. If you say "family film" I think 1 hour 30, 45 maybe, if you say "thriller" I think 2 hours+... I know there are no hard and fast rules about it, but here's the thing, there wasn't enough content to fill that time. Yes, they managed to fill the runtime, but so much of it was unnecessary. Her mother's storyline seemed entirely there to get her to London, which could easily have been done in several ways, there's one scene in particular that seemed to go nowhere. I hate to say it, but Fiona Shaw and her finishing school were completely surplus to requirements too, nothing happened there that was very relevant at all. Some of the additions to what is quite a simple story made it a little complicated, though complicated isn't quite the right word because everything was easy to grasp (when it was relevant), perhaps "fussy" would be a better choice.
When the film ended I knew we were being set up for round 2, though this one came with less of a sickening groan than Artemis Fowl's did. I don't know how the books run as a series so I'd be interested to see how they compare, but I'm not a fan of continued storyline and that will definitely be on the cards for a sequel.
While I'm fully aware I've just moaned about a lot of points, the film is definitely watchable, but for me it was too cluttered and drawn out to hold my attention. With some snipping here and there it could have been vastly improved.
(My god, I didn't even mention the 4th wall breaking or the very end... but I guess no one really wants a full essay on the subject.)
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/10/enola-holmes-movie-review.html
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Enola Holmes (2020) in Movies
Oct 4, 2020
Millie Bobby Brown - a confident raw talent (1 more)
Henry Cavill as a new take on Sherlock
The unsinkable Millie Bobby Brown
Sherlock Holmes never had a sister. But if he did, what adventures would Enola Holmes get up to? That’s the premise behind this Netflix feature. starring rising star Millie Bobby Brown.
Enola Holmes (Millie Bobby Brown) thinks she’s been named as such because it spells “alone” backwards. (But then, she admits, that it doesn’t seem to follow for either kcolrehs or tforcym!)
Enola has been brought up by her dearest mother Eudoria (Helena Bonham Carter) to be a strong and confident woman, free of the normal 19th century rituals of ladylike husband-seeking niceties: for her, it’s all mental gymnastics and martial arts. But when on her 16th birthday her mother vanishes, Enola sets out on a quest to find her. But Eudoria is a Holmes, and knows the value of clues and how to cover her tracks.
Of greater concern to Enola is her brother and ward Mycroft (Sam Claflin), who is intent on packing her off to the Victorian finishing school of Miss Harrison (“Killing Eve’s” Fiona Shaw). But while trying to escape from her brothers – not a trivial matter when one is the famous detective Sherlock (Henry Cavill) – Enola encounters a Marquess on the run (Louis Partridge) and adventure, intrigue and murder are on the cards.
Filming in this “Fleabag” style – where the lead is constantly breaking the fourth wall – requires a confidence in delivery that many young actors would struggle with. But not Millie Bobby Brown. Her asides and camera glances – while not quite as skillful as the astonishingly accomplished Phoebe Waller-Bridge – are nonetheless impressive and constantly entertaining. An underwater wink at the camera was particularly enjoyable.
So… actress – tick!
But perhaps more impressive to me was that the 16 year old – most famous for her role in “Stranger Things”, which I still haven’t watched – was also a PRODUCER of this movie. Which makes me think she is a serious person to watch in the movie business (if there ever is a movie business left after 2020). I read that she is the youngest person ever to appear on the annual list of the “world’s 100 most influential people” by Time magazine: so others agree!
The supporting case are a broad array of British acting talent, with Henry Cavill being particularly appealing as Sherlock, Burn Gorman at his slimy evil best as a murderous henchman, and Sam Claflin being as anonymous as I always find him. (That’s a compliment by the way: whereas I see some actors and think “oh, there’s <<Tom Hanks>> again”, I never recognize Claflin until the credits role… he is a chameleon of the acting world).
But acting the socks off everyone else for me is Frances de la Tour as the Marquess’s grandmother. A deliciously twinkling and charming performance from an old dame of the screen.
The similarities with “Fleabag” are not coincidental, since the director is Harry Bradbeer; director of all of the episodes except the original pilot. But it’s unfortunate in some ways that the style has been interpolated into the Holmes story. Since, of course, this approach was previously done by Guy Ritchie in the two very entertaining movies featuring Robert Downey Jnr and Jude Law. And for me, that’s a shame. Since although the styles are markedly different – here we have a lot of Paddington-style cardboard animations – the “feel” of the films is the same. As such, it doesn’t feel as novel as it should do. Why couldn’t she have been someone else’s sister? Houdini perhaps? Or Oscar Wilde?
As two hours of entertaining escapism, Enola Holmes worked well for me. Brown is eminently watchable, and given the Netflix response to the movie, a sequel would be – I expect – on the cards.
(For the full graphical review, please visit the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/10/04/the-unsinkable-millie-bobby-brown/. Thanks.)
Enola Holmes (Millie Bobby Brown) thinks she’s been named as such because it spells “alone” backwards. (But then, she admits, that it doesn’t seem to follow for either kcolrehs or tforcym!)
Enola has been brought up by her dearest mother Eudoria (Helena Bonham Carter) to be a strong and confident woman, free of the normal 19th century rituals of ladylike husband-seeking niceties: for her, it’s all mental gymnastics and martial arts. But when on her 16th birthday her mother vanishes, Enola sets out on a quest to find her. But Eudoria is a Holmes, and knows the value of clues and how to cover her tracks.
Of greater concern to Enola is her brother and ward Mycroft (Sam Claflin), who is intent on packing her off to the Victorian finishing school of Miss Harrison (“Killing Eve’s” Fiona Shaw). But while trying to escape from her brothers – not a trivial matter when one is the famous detective Sherlock (Henry Cavill) – Enola encounters a Marquess on the run (Louis Partridge) and adventure, intrigue and murder are on the cards.
Filming in this “Fleabag” style – where the lead is constantly breaking the fourth wall – requires a confidence in delivery that many young actors would struggle with. But not Millie Bobby Brown. Her asides and camera glances – while not quite as skillful as the astonishingly accomplished Phoebe Waller-Bridge – are nonetheless impressive and constantly entertaining. An underwater wink at the camera was particularly enjoyable.
So… actress – tick!
But perhaps more impressive to me was that the 16 year old – most famous for her role in “Stranger Things”, which I still haven’t watched – was also a PRODUCER of this movie. Which makes me think she is a serious person to watch in the movie business (if there ever is a movie business left after 2020). I read that she is the youngest person ever to appear on the annual list of the “world’s 100 most influential people” by Time magazine: so others agree!
The supporting case are a broad array of British acting talent, with Henry Cavill being particularly appealing as Sherlock, Burn Gorman at his slimy evil best as a murderous henchman, and Sam Claflin being as anonymous as I always find him. (That’s a compliment by the way: whereas I see some actors and think “oh, there’s <<Tom Hanks>> again”, I never recognize Claflin until the credits role… he is a chameleon of the acting world).
But acting the socks off everyone else for me is Frances de la Tour as the Marquess’s grandmother. A deliciously twinkling and charming performance from an old dame of the screen.
The similarities with “Fleabag” are not coincidental, since the director is Harry Bradbeer; director of all of the episodes except the original pilot. But it’s unfortunate in some ways that the style has been interpolated into the Holmes story. Since, of course, this approach was previously done by Guy Ritchie in the two very entertaining movies featuring Robert Downey Jnr and Jude Law. And for me, that’s a shame. Since although the styles are markedly different – here we have a lot of Paddington-style cardboard animations – the “feel” of the films is the same. As such, it doesn’t feel as novel as it should do. Why couldn’t she have been someone else’s sister? Houdini perhaps? Or Oscar Wilde?
As two hours of entertaining escapism, Enola Holmes worked well for me. Brown is eminently watchable, and given the Netflix response to the movie, a sequel would be – I expect – on the cards.
(For the full graphical review, please visit the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/10/04/the-unsinkable-millie-bobby-brown/. Thanks.)
Benedict Cumberbatch
Book
Benedict Cumberbatch is an award-winning actor with a bright future. His roles as Sherlock Holmes in...
Morning Short
Podcast
Enjoy a new, curated short story every episode. We hand-pick 15-25 minute short stories from a pool...
Daily Inspiring Quotes - Get motivation from the greatest minds!
Lifestyle and Reference
App
Receive daily wisdom from the most notable personalities. * Over 5400 inspirational, interesting,...
Literary Yarns
Book
Comics fans have action figures. Sports fans get trading cards. But what about literature lovers?...
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Tag (2018) in Movies
Jul 28, 2018
Pretty Funny
A group of friends' have relied on a monthly game of Tag to stay in contact with each other. The friends must come together to take down Jerry (Jeremy Renner), the only one in their circle who has never been tagged. Sound stupid? Sure. However it's a lot less cornier and a lot funnier than you might imagine.
Acting: 10
This star-studded cast really came to play, pun-intended. I can only imagine how challenging it would be to take a role like this so seriously while trying to have fun at the same time, but each of the actors/actresses managed their roles perfectly and brought their own style to the game. Isla Fisher was my personal favorite playing the role of Anna Malloy who desperately wants to be initiated into the Tag group but has to settle for (aggressively) helping her husband win. Her intensity cracks me up in every scene she plays in.
Beginning: 8
Characters: 10
I loved that these characters weren't flat, but fleshed out, which made for even better comedy in the longrun. Aside from Anna, you've got Susan Crosby (Leslie Bibb), a perfectionist who wants to keep the Tag game away from her perfect wedding. Jerry's character is a flat-out masterpiece, a bit of Pink Panther meets Sherlock Holmes. Every character brings their own uniqueness to the game.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Speaking of Sherlock Holmes, I loved the Holmes-esque cinematics used when capturing Jerry's aversion tactics. Straight out of an action film, watching him duck and dive without breaking a sweat while all the other players destroy themselves is hilarious. The slo-mo captures are perfect, something akin to a Michael Bay or John Woo film.
Conflict: 5
Genre: 7
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Plot: 8
Resolution: 8
Somewhat cheesy, it still manages to get the job done. Considering how preposterous the rest of the film is, the ending works just fine.
Overall: 84
The comedy is up and down, but overall, Tag is solidly funny. With a unique concept and a great cast, this is a film that will definitely keep you entertained.
Acting: 10
This star-studded cast really came to play, pun-intended. I can only imagine how challenging it would be to take a role like this so seriously while trying to have fun at the same time, but each of the actors/actresses managed their roles perfectly and brought their own style to the game. Isla Fisher was my personal favorite playing the role of Anna Malloy who desperately wants to be initiated into the Tag group but has to settle for (aggressively) helping her husband win. Her intensity cracks me up in every scene she plays in.
Beginning: 8
Characters: 10
I loved that these characters weren't flat, but fleshed out, which made for even better comedy in the longrun. Aside from Anna, you've got Susan Crosby (Leslie Bibb), a perfectionist who wants to keep the Tag game away from her perfect wedding. Jerry's character is a flat-out masterpiece, a bit of Pink Panther meets Sherlock Holmes. Every character brings their own uniqueness to the game.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Speaking of Sherlock Holmes, I loved the Holmes-esque cinematics used when capturing Jerry's aversion tactics. Straight out of an action film, watching him duck and dive without breaking a sweat while all the other players destroy themselves is hilarious. The slo-mo captures are perfect, something akin to a Michael Bay or John Woo film.
Conflict: 5
Genre: 7
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Plot: 8
Resolution: 8
Somewhat cheesy, it still manages to get the job done. Considering how preposterous the rest of the film is, the ending works just fine.
Overall: 84
The comedy is up and down, but overall, Tag is solidly funny. With a unique concept and a great cast, this is a film that will definitely keep you entertained.
Kyera (8 KP) rated The Last of August (Charlotte Holmes #2) in Books
Jan 31, 2018
The Last of August introduces us to even more members of the Holmes and Moriarty families. After being framed for murder, what other trouble could Charlotte and Jamie possibly get themselves into? You’d be surprised. Charlotte and Jamie decide to spend Christmas break together in Europe. First, they visit Jamie’s mom where Charlotte gets to experience a more normal family life. Then, they travel to the Holmes manor in Sussex which is much less welcoming and far more confusing. Charlotte’s father, Alistair is imposing, her mother Emma questions Jamie’s motives, and her brother Milo rarely leaves his flat in Berlin. Charlotte’s family is not particularly warm and friendly, so it’s a welcome change when Jamie meets his father’s best friend and Charlotte’s Uncle Leander Holmes. Leander is sociable and kind, more comfortable at parties than the other members of his family and frequently hired to discover art crime/forgeries.
Their uneventful break ends suddenly when Leander disappears mysteriously and Charlotte’s mother is poisoned. These events set Charlotte and Jamie on a whirlwind adventure across Europe to discover the truth. They are joined by August Moriarty, to Jamie’s dismay and a contingent of Milo’s hired grunts. August is likable even though he is a Moriarty and we’re not always sure if we can trust him. We are introduced to his brother Hadrian and his sister Philippa, but not the more ruthless Lucien. I expect he will be the “big bad” for the third book, if not his parents so the reveal and development of their characters will wait until then.
Overall, the mystery and plot of this book were just as interested as the first in the series. There isn’t much else to add without spoilers, so just go read it. Highly recommended to young adult/teen fans of mystery, contemporary, or the classic Sherlock Holmes novels. I fell in love with this series and can’t wait to see how the series is concluded.
Their uneventful break ends suddenly when Leander disappears mysteriously and Charlotte’s mother is poisoned. These events set Charlotte and Jamie on a whirlwind adventure across Europe to discover the truth. They are joined by August Moriarty, to Jamie’s dismay and a contingent of Milo’s hired grunts. August is likable even though he is a Moriarty and we’re not always sure if we can trust him. We are introduced to his brother Hadrian and his sister Philippa, but not the more ruthless Lucien. I expect he will be the “big bad” for the third book, if not his parents so the reveal and development of their characters will wait until then.
Overall, the mystery and plot of this book were just as interested as the first in the series. There isn’t much else to add without spoilers, so just go read it. Highly recommended to young adult/teen fans of mystery, contemporary, or the classic Sherlock Holmes novels. I fell in love with this series and can’t wait to see how the series is concluded.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Holmes and Watson (2018) in Movies
Apr 27, 2020
They can't all be winners
Well...they can't all be winners.
I know that Will Ferrell is an "acquired taste" - either you like the "all in" comedy of this man, or you don't. I happen to like Ferrell, his comedy has aged on me like a fine wine. I find that some of his most recent films like THE OTHER GUYS and THE HOUSE are very funny (maybe not as funny as ANCHORMAN...but what is). I think this comedian still has his fastball.
But, sometimes, wine doesn't age well, it turns into vinegar. And for Ferrell, this vinegar is the comedic dud that is HOLMES & WATSON.
Partnering with familiar on-screen partner John C. Reilly (who paired with Ferrell in films like STEP BROTHERS and TALLEDEGA NIGHTS) this film is a parody of the multitude of Sherlock Holmes films - this time showing that not only is Holmes and idiot but so is Watson. But, somehow, they manage to solve the crime and save the day anyway.
Ferrell is (typically) over-the-top and obtuse as Holmes. Usually, this combination works for him (see ANCHORMAN) but it just falls flat here. Same thing for John C. Reilly's Watson - he is just as over-the-top and obtuse and (I think) that's the beginning of the problem here. The two just bounce off each other without the joke landing on either of them - nor does it land of the audience.
Ralph Fiennes (Moriarty), Rebecca Hall (potential girlfriend), Rob Brydon (Inspector Lestrade) and Kelly Macdonald (Mrs. Hudson) all fair poorly with poor material to work with.
Writer/Director Etan (that's Etan, not Ethan) Cohen (IDIOCRACY) does nothing to help things here with either his writing or his direction. My only thought here is that he thought that Ferrell and Reilly could improvise themselves into a good film.
It didn't happen.
Letter Grade: C (because I guffawed out loud - despite myself - a couple of times)
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
I know that Will Ferrell is an "acquired taste" - either you like the "all in" comedy of this man, or you don't. I happen to like Ferrell, his comedy has aged on me like a fine wine. I find that some of his most recent films like THE OTHER GUYS and THE HOUSE are very funny (maybe not as funny as ANCHORMAN...but what is). I think this comedian still has his fastball.
But, sometimes, wine doesn't age well, it turns into vinegar. And for Ferrell, this vinegar is the comedic dud that is HOLMES & WATSON.
Partnering with familiar on-screen partner John C. Reilly (who paired with Ferrell in films like STEP BROTHERS and TALLEDEGA NIGHTS) this film is a parody of the multitude of Sherlock Holmes films - this time showing that not only is Holmes and idiot but so is Watson. But, somehow, they manage to solve the crime and save the day anyway.
Ferrell is (typically) over-the-top and obtuse as Holmes. Usually, this combination works for him (see ANCHORMAN) but it just falls flat here. Same thing for John C. Reilly's Watson - he is just as over-the-top and obtuse and (I think) that's the beginning of the problem here. The two just bounce off each other without the joke landing on either of them - nor does it land of the audience.
Ralph Fiennes (Moriarty), Rebecca Hall (potential girlfriend), Rob Brydon (Inspector Lestrade) and Kelly Macdonald (Mrs. Hudson) all fair poorly with poor material to work with.
Writer/Director Etan (that's Etan, not Ethan) Cohen (IDIOCRACY) does nothing to help things here with either his writing or his direction. My only thought here is that he thought that Ferrell and Reilly could improvise themselves into a good film.
It didn't happen.
Letter Grade: C (because I guffawed out loud - despite myself - a couple of times)
4 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)