There is a new criminal mastermind at large--Professor Moriarty--and not only is he Holmes’ intellectual equal, but his capacity for evil and lack of conscience may give him an advantage over the detective.
Guy Ritchieâ€™ Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011): Sir Arthur Con
Warner Bros. Pictures along with Director brings us Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011), a follow up to their Sherlock Holmes (2009), which sees Robert Downey Jr. back as the title character. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, picks up shortly after the first film, where Holmes is made aware of the existence of Professor James Moriarty (played by the excellent Jared Harris), a criminal mastermind. Holmes is connecting a series of crimes that others believe to be random acts of anarchy, to Moriarty. Moriarty warns Holmes to stay out of his affairs or else Dr. John Watson (Jude Law), Holmesâ€™ companion and roommate, will be the target of his retaliation. Holmes saves Watson then embarks with the good doctor in a dangerous cat and mouse chase across Europe to prevent a war from rising.
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is by far Guy Ritchieâ€™s poorest effort. Robert Downey Jr.â€™s acting is woeful. His accent is nothing close to being British, let alone Victorian. He is overly fidgety in an attempt to be eccentric. His dialog delivery is very rapid. He leaves no pause between Holmesâ€™ words for the audience to savor their meaning. Perhaps this was Ritchieâ€™s attempt to cover up flaws in the screenwriting. The screenwriters, Michele and Kieran Mulroney, fail to come up with a brilliant Sherlock Holmesâ€™ deduction. They instead opt to stun the audiences into a state of information overload, preventing them from realizing how farfetched those supposedly smart analysis really are. We are supposed to believe that when spotting a wine stain on a piece of paper, Holmes deduced that the printing press must have been in a wine cellar. Apparently thatâ€™s the only way wine could get on a piece of paper. The story is essentially your usual point A to point B to point C plot, where Holmes hops from one scene of action and explosion to the next.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyleâ€™s Sherlock Holmes is supposed to be a detective with incredible deductive abilities, coupled with a sharp intellect. Instead Ritchie gives us a modern action hero much like Daniel Craig's tough James Bond mashed with the eccentric and fun of Jonny Deppâ€™s Jack Sparrow. Ritchie directs Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows as if it was Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998) with a great deal of jarring camera angles and slow motion action scenes made popular by The Matrix (1999). Perhaps that was yet another attempt at dazzling the audience to mask the horrendous quality of the writing.
Doyleâ€™s Sherlock Holmes is a detective and his genre is mystery. Yet there is practically no element of mystery in film. Instead we have a poor action/adventure movie that is meant for the entertainment of a mass audience and not for their pleasure.
Violence to literature ought to be a new class of victims in our culture of losers. That, along with sarcasm as a controlled substance. When I walked out of this movie I felt like I had seen Iron Man again but with different clothes. Downey should stick to comic books. In a tv interview Jude Law said he never read the originals. I think it onley appropriate that those who deface and demean great fictional characters should remain ignorant of their origins. Ultimatley this movie had too much in common with the League of extrodinary overpaid gentlemen - not much acting and too many slow motion fight scenes.
This film i saw in the cinema, it was worth watching and very capturing. I enjoyed it, the filming was brilliant and very unique slow motion and grayscale-medium shots. The music was sycronised well and i have always loved the theme tune.
I would say, you have to be in the mood to enjoy this film. The humour and relationship between actors and characters are fab, it comes through and creates a great atmosphere.
A film for everyone
This film had a significantly different feel to it in comparison to the first, but it was equally as captivating and well executed. The attention to detail and consistency with the script play out are arguably the best I have seen in a long while.
While most sequels flop with richness in script and development of characters, in my opinion Game of Shadows has excelled. Well done and definitely one I will want to see again in the cinemas.
It was very slow in the beginning, but towards the end it picks up. My favorite part of the movie was the fights. The fights were very cool, the movie pauses and Robert Downey Jr. explains what will happen if it goes normally, but he changes one factor in the fight then it changes in real time, it's pretty cool. Also the ending is annoying, but cool I won't spoil anything, but I liked it .
In this new Sherlock Holmes flick, Holmes and the doctor reunite to take down professor Moriarty.
I enjoyed the first of these Sherlock Holmes movies, but this one was not quite up to snuff. It wasn’t bad, but it wasn’t as good as I had hoped. I might of liked this one even more then the first if it weren’t for several large problems with the film, the characters (or lack there of,) and the stupid/awesome ending.
The characters were just to week. The relationship between the two main characters is blurred or passed over completely. In the first film Holmes and the doctor are both very different people, and you get to enjoy their relationship in their differences and similarities, you get pulled into their friendship. In the sequel this is set aside for more action sequences. The doctors more subtle character becomes one dimensional, and Holmes personality mutates into a silly parody of its self. The female characters from the first film are also undermined, they are both kicked out of the film in short order and swiftly replaced by the blandest leading lady I have seen in a film for a while.
The ending both angered me, and admittedly was very cool. At the end of the movie Sherlock Holmes dies . . . sort of. Near the end of the movie he grabs Moriarty and jumps off a cliff like in the books. I was amazed, there actually are going to kill him off? I thought, this is great! But at the very end it inexplicably turns out he was alive, which was also awesome, but a little frustrating. I don’t like it when movies cop-out like that.
Like I said the movie wasn’t bad, there were some parts I really liked. I loved doctor Moriarty in this film, I really liked the action sequences and the adventure feel of the movie really pulled you into what was going on.
Moriarty is very good, he is basically a bond villain in this movie, and I don’t mean that in a bad way. He is a fun villain, its fun to listen to him monologue, its fun to watch him do his evil deeds and it’s even more fun to watch his inevitable downfall. Moriarty probably could’ve been better, but I expected him to be a lot worse.
I liked the action sequences as well. I would have proffered to see more of Holmes trying to outsmart Moriarty and less of him trying to out shoot his thugs, but the action, like Moriarty, is larger then life and fun.
I guess that really is the redeeming quality of this movie, despite how lacking it is in the brain stem department, it still brings you a fun adventure. So if you’re a Sherlock fan, hungry for action and adventure then you should see this movie, but if you are expecting anything more then that, there are much better films then this in theatres.