**** minor spoilers ahead. ****
One way to look at this movie is simply to forget that it has anything to do with Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson. It's simply a movie about a detective and doctor solving a series of mysterious murders in late 19th century London. Taken in this light, it's a great movie. They create a very convincing late 19th century London in terms of visuals. But more importantly the movie captures the zeitgeist of the emerging scientific and industrial revolutions vs the elites' fascination with mysticism. In some sense the whole movie revolves around this theme.
I'd heard a lot of people worry that the movie was going to "steampunk" Sherlock Holmes. It's true that there is a lot in this movie for steampunk fans to love. There's lots of do it your self science and forenscics. Lots of cool mechanical contraptions which turn out to be central to the plot. But the cool contraptions never take center stage. They are props to help capture the sense of the times.
Sherlock Holmes purists, however, will find lots to hate about this movie. The kindest thing that can be said about their portrayal of Sherlock Holmes is that he's been "rebooted," much in the same way Star Trek and Doctor Who has been rebooted. But the fact of the matter is that the movie changes Sherlock Holmes into a man that's almost unrecognizable from the Sherlock Holmes in the Sir Arthur Conan Doyle books.
Here's how Wikipedia describes the character of Sherlock Holmes:
"A brilliant London-based 'consulting detective', Holmes is famous for his intellectual prowess and is renowned for his skillful use of astute observation, deductive reasoning and forensic skills to solve difficult cases."The Sherlock Holmes of the books is extremely intellectual, introverted, and somewhat reclusive. His brilliance comes from his scientific knowledge and his analytical abilities. He is more than willing to let the police do the dirty work and the heavy lifting. Sure, there are times when he puts himself in danger, but it's usually because he needs to collect eveidence to make his case.
The Sherlock Holmes of the movie retains some of these traits. Both he and Watson are on the leading edge of scientific knowledge of their times. And the film has a very cool cinematic device that gives you insight into his razor sharp mind, which sadly they drop in the second reel of the movie. That's too bad because there are a couple of scenes at the end which could have used it.
The Sherlock Holmes of the movie hints at him being a recluse. The movie opens with him in a deep funk of boredom after not having had a case in 3 weeks. His brilliant mind is so bored he's shooting holes in the walls of his rented flat. he ventures out for social engagements only when cajoled by Watson. But this is only a hint of the darker side of the Holmes from the books, who, as I recall, has a drug (opiate?) addiciton and is somewhat misanthropic. All of this is conveniently erased from the movie version of Holmes. (Although he shamelessly smokes in the movie! gasp!)
But worse than the traits they downplayed and erased are the things they added to Sherlock Holmes in the movie. The director clearly wanted to reinvent Holmes (and Watson too) as action adventure heroes that Modern Audiences can relate to. So the movie version of Holmes and Watson are first class boxers and street fighters. Holmes runs around a lot. He swings on ropes high above the sky line. he dives into the Thames from upper floors of Parliament. He rescues Damsels in distress from buzz saws. They could have called his movie "Lethal Weapon 1890"and it would have worked. These characters might be fun enjoyable folks to watch on the movie screen, but they aren't the Holmes and Watson we know.
The other criticism I'd heard going into the movie was that they'd inserted a homoerotic subtext into the movie. But I suspect this was nothing but a PR stunt cooked up by the movie promoters. There are two secondary plot lines in the movie that introduce female love interests in to the Holmes world. Watson is engaged to be married and is preparing to move out of the flat he shares with Holmes. Holmes actively works to sabotage Watson's relationship with fiancee. But it's clear that it's because Holmes is dependent on Watson for interacting with the outside world. Likewise Watson is in turn dependent on Holmes to keep his gambling addiction under control. (I think this is also something the movie added. I don't recall this from the books). The two often bicker with each other. But whether it's the bickering of a couple who've been in a long term relationship or the bickering of Gibson and Glover in Lethal Weapon is for the viewer to decide. Likewise, Watson's fiancee openly acknowledges that Watson cares as much for Holmes as her, but at the same time she doesn't act like it's unseemly or inappropriate. The movie acknowledges Holmes and Watson's mutually dependent relationship but as far as I could see they never Cross The Line and sexualized it.
So I for one thoroughly enjoyed the movie. I can wholeheartedly sympathize with Sherlock Holmes purists. Seeing it through their eyes, the movie is an abomination. But the reinvention of Homes has given us another fun action hero/adventure franchise to follow and I for one am already looking forward to the next movie. Between this and Iron Man, Robert Downey Jr is going to be making movies for a long long time.
