Jude Law Talks Sherlock Holmes 3

Summary

"We're a very happy team and we have a lot of fun and we also think there's still a lot of legs in the duo." Back to Article

Comments

Gordon Franklin Terry Sr

Gordon Terry

you know?

If they shot HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES it would be laughed off the screen -- audiences today are hopped-up on high action, lavish special effects, and noise passing for sound effects.

Sep 17 - 02:35 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

What about Hound of the Baskervilles necessarily precludes any of that? It's one of the minority stories where Watson uses a gun, the hound itself could be a cool special effect and there's always an excuse for noise.

Sep 17 - 05:10 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

What about Hound of the Baskervilles necessarily precludes any of that? It's one of the minority stories where Watson uses a gun, the hound itself could be a cool special effect and there's always an excuse for noise.

Sep 17 - 05:10 PM

Valmordas

Val Mordas

While the chemistry between Holmes and Watson has been spot on throughout the series, the two films have been woefully lacking in one major department - mystery. There just isn't any.

Sep 17 - 08:06 PM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

One of my primary complaints of the Ritchie series.

Sep 17 - 11:31 PM

scifimark

scifi mark

Yea i felt the same way. I felt like sherlock holmes needs, well more sherlock holmes.

Sep 18 - 06:56 AM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Yeah, but haven't we seen that portrayed a thousand times, the guy with the pipe in the hat and coat and stuffy upper crust accent. I for one applaud Ritchie for exploring those aspects of Holmes that were at least subtextually there and rarely explored.

Sep 18 - 06:36 PM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

Pipes, hats and accents are mere characterization issues. The problem is that these new films neglect the elements of the detective drama genre. There is never any real question in either of the Ritchie films who the culprit, the "whodunit", is, nor are the mechanics of the plot particularly puzzling.

Sep 19 - 12:24 AM

Valmordas

Val Mordas

We have seen it before, and certainly the 'Holmes gone wild" take on the material is fresh and welcome. There's no reason we can't have our cake and eat it too by adding a more mysterious and twisting plot, and keeping some villians....shrouded in mystery.

Sep 19 - 10:26 AM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Wasn't Moriarty kept shrouded in mystery the entire first movie? I don't know, I'm not totally against the idea of more mystery. I just didn't really miss it from the first two films. He has mysteries to solve especially in the first one, I guess I just don't miss the old Holmes detective lesson "Elementary my dear Watson" moments as much as some. Plus, having read most of the Holmes work I probably enjoyed the in jokes better and figuring out how they were going to include the classic Holmes idea's like Reichenbach falls in the new narrative.

Sep 19 - 09:24 PM

Voice O. Reason

Voice O'Reason

There may not be much mystery, but they replaced it with fun--and a lot of it!

Sep 18 - 09:13 PM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

And these things are mutually exclusive...why?

Sep 18 - 10:56 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

They're not mutually exclusive, but neither are they requirements for a good detective story. You have hundreds of stories and hundreds of film and tv incarnations of the Holmes who solves whodunit's and thousands of those types of stories that were inspired and mimic Holmes style and formula. This Holmes dared to shake up the tried and true and did it well. I for one think that deserves praise. The Holmes-Watson relationship is as well done as anything and prior to this you almost never see Holmes as an up front man of action and anything more than a being of pure intellect. They did all that and didn't dumb him down or make him a boring stereotype.

Sep 19 - 06:25 AM

Voice O. Reason

Voice O'Reason

No one said they are mutually exclusive.

Sep 20 - 12:01 AM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

One of my primary complaints of the Ritchie series.

Sep 17 - 11:31 PM

scifimark

scifi mark

Yea i felt the same way. I felt like sherlock holmes needs, well more sherlock holmes.

Sep 18 - 06:56 AM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Yeah, but haven't we seen that portrayed a thousand times, the guy with the pipe in the hat and coat and stuffy upper crust accent. I for one applaud Ritchie for exploring those aspects of Holmes that were at least subtextually there and rarely explored.

Sep 18 - 06:36 PM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

Pipes, hats and accents are mere characterization issues. The problem is that these new films neglect the elements of the detective drama genre. There is never any real question in either of the Ritchie films who the culprit, the "whodunit", is, nor are the mechanics of the plot particularly puzzling.

Sep 19 - 12:24 AM

Valmordas

Val Mordas

We have seen it before, and certainly the 'Holmes gone wild" take on the material is fresh and welcome. There's no reason we can't have our cake and eat it too by adding a more mysterious and twisting plot, and keeping some villians....shrouded in mystery.

Sep 19 - 10:26 AM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Wasn't Moriarty kept shrouded in mystery the entire first movie? I don't know, I'm not totally against the idea of more mystery. I just didn't really miss it from the first two films. He has mysteries to solve especially in the first one, I guess I just don't miss the old Holmes detective lesson "Elementary my dear Watson" moments as much as some. Plus, having read most of the Holmes work I probably enjoyed the in jokes better and figuring out how they were going to include the classic Holmes idea's like Reichenbach falls in the new narrative.

Sep 19 - 09:24 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Yeah, but haven't we seen that portrayed a thousand times, the guy with the pipe in the hat and coat and stuffy upper crust accent. I for one applaud Ritchie for exploring those aspects of Holmes that were at least subtextually there and rarely explored.

Sep 18 - 06:36 PM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

Pipes, hats and accents are mere characterization issues. The problem is that these new films neglect the elements of the detective drama genre. There is never any real question in either of the Ritchie films who the culprit, the "whodunit", is, nor are the mechanics of the plot particularly puzzling.

Sep 19 - 12:24 AM

Valmordas

Val Mordas

We have seen it before, and certainly the 'Holmes gone wild" take on the material is fresh and welcome. There's no reason we can't have our cake and eat it too by adding a more mysterious and twisting plot, and keeping some villians....shrouded in mystery.

Sep 19 - 10:26 AM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Wasn't Moriarty kept shrouded in mystery the entire first movie? I don't know, I'm not totally against the idea of more mystery. I just didn't really miss it from the first two films. He has mysteries to solve especially in the first one, I guess I just don't miss the old Holmes detective lesson "Elementary my dear Watson" moments as much as some. Plus, having read most of the Holmes work I probably enjoyed the in jokes better and figuring out how they were going to include the classic Holmes idea's like Reichenbach falls in the new narrative.

Sep 19 - 09:24 PM

Voice O. Reason

Voice O'Reason

There may not be much mystery, but they replaced it with fun--and a lot of it!

Sep 18 - 09:13 PM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

And these things are mutually exclusive...why?

Sep 18 - 10:56 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

They're not mutually exclusive, but neither are they requirements for a good detective story. You have hundreds of stories and hundreds of film and tv incarnations of the Holmes who solves whodunit's and thousands of those types of stories that were inspired and mimic Holmes style and formula. This Holmes dared to shake up the tried and true and did it well. I for one think that deserves praise. The Holmes-Watson relationship is as well done as anything and prior to this you almost never see Holmes as an up front man of action and anything more than a being of pure intellect. They did all that and didn't dumb him down or make him a boring stereotype.

Sep 19 - 06:25 AM

Voice O. Reason

Voice O'Reason

No one said they are mutually exclusive.

Sep 20 - 12:01 AM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

And these things are mutually exclusive...why?

Sep 18 - 10:56 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

They're not mutually exclusive, but neither are they requirements for a good detective story. You have hundreds of stories and hundreds of film and tv incarnations of the Holmes who solves whodunit's and thousands of those types of stories that were inspired and mimic Holmes style and formula. This Holmes dared to shake up the tried and true and did it well. I for one think that deserves praise. The Holmes-Watson relationship is as well done as anything and prior to this you almost never see Holmes as an up front man of action and anything more than a being of pure intellect. They did all that and didn't dumb him down or make him a boring stereotype.

Sep 19 - 06:25 AM

Voice O. Reason

Voice O'Reason

No one said they are mutually exclusive.

Sep 20 - 12:01 AM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

Pipes, hats and accents are mere characterization issues. The problem is that these new films neglect the elements of the detective drama genre. There is never any real question in either of the Ritchie films who the culprit, the "whodunit", is, nor are the mechanics of the plot particularly puzzling.

Sep 19 - 12:24 AM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

They're not mutually exclusive, but neither are they requirements for a good detective story. You have hundreds of stories and hundreds of film and tv incarnations of the Holmes who solves whodunit's and thousands of those types of stories that were inspired and mimic Holmes style and formula. This Holmes dared to shake up the tried and true and did it well. I for one think that deserves praise. The Holmes-Watson relationship is as well done as anything and prior to this you almost never see Holmes as an up front man of action and anything more than a being of pure intellect. They did all that and didn't dumb him down or make him a boring stereotype.

Sep 19 - 06:25 AM

Valmordas

Val Mordas

We have seen it before, and certainly the 'Holmes gone wild" take on the material is fresh and welcome. There's no reason we can't have our cake and eat it too by adding a more mysterious and twisting plot, and keeping some villians....shrouded in mystery.

Sep 19 - 10:26 AM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Wasn't Moriarty kept shrouded in mystery the entire first movie? I don't know, I'm not totally against the idea of more mystery. I just didn't really miss it from the first two films. He has mysteries to solve especially in the first one, I guess I just don't miss the old Holmes detective lesson "Elementary my dear Watson" moments as much as some. Plus, having read most of the Holmes work I probably enjoyed the in jokes better and figuring out how they were going to include the classic Holmes idea's like Reichenbach falls in the new narrative.

Sep 19 - 09:24 PM

Voice O. Reason

Voice O'Reason

No one said they are mutually exclusive.

Sep 20 - 12:01 AM

What's Hot On RT

Critics Consensus
Critics Consensus

Transcendence is a Sci-Fi Snooze

Total Recall
Total Recall

Johnny Depp's Best Movies

24 Frames
24 Frames

Picture gallery of movie bears

Good Friday
Good Friday

50 movie posters gallery

Find us on:                 
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile