?

Log in

No account? Create an account
beekeeping

December 2012

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     
Powered by LiveJournal.com
H and W otp

frankymole in persianslippers

Preview of Guy Ritchie "Holmes" movie

{This amused me. Originally posted on a Dr Who forum by user "DamnYouVileWoman!", it sums up pretty much everything I think about this endeavour!}

As soon as I read in the initial press release for this film that they intended to, "put more emphasis on the action/adventure elements of the original stories," I realised I couldn't wait to see the many exciting fistfights, carriage chases, shootouts, martial arts battles and people running away from explosions in slow motion from Conan Doyle's original stories finally realised on the big screen!

Imagine my excitement when they hired Guy Ritchie to direct it! A man who gave us all the glorious sub-genre that is the, "Modern, Cockney Gangster Flick," that I have always loved so much, holding it in my heart just above films about talking animals that can play sports! A man who, in an eleven year career has managed to produce one successful film..... Eleven years ago! Yes, he has managed to produce some of the most worthless dreck ("Swept Away," "Revolver") since but you know.... He obviously wasn't really trying, what with being too busy getting over having to wake up next to Madonna every morning! Who better to bring The Great Detective to the silver screen once more?!

And who better to play the man himself than Robert Downey, Jr? A terrific actor, a mix of leading man and character actor who suddenly finds himself a box office draw thanks to, "Iron Man." A man who seemingly, if the trailer is anything to go by, believes an English accent is what Patrick McGoohan (by way of Dick Van Dyke) spoke with.

Jude Law as Watson? Genuis! How I've loved him in..... errrr..... STUFF! And Mark Strong as Moriar... sorry... Lord Blackwood? A man whose cinematic output is only eclipsed by whatever insanely innapropriate wig the make-up department attempts to staple to his head! Then the wonderful way the managed to cast Rachel McAdams so that Irene Adler can finally be portrayed the way Conan Doyle intended her to be, as an 18 year old member of the Pussycat Dolls! A masterstroke if ever there was one!

And then that trailer! Oh my word! Finally! There on the big screen! The slapstick humour I have always loved in the original stories! How thrilled I was as that classic scene, I forget which story it comes from, where Irene Adler strips off down to her sexy undies, kicks Holmes in the nuts then leaves him cuffed naked to a bed was finally brought to celluloid at last! Along with the explosions, slow motion fights and martial arts that always made my pulse race whenever I read them! I can hardly wait til Christmas now!

Seriously now, I love the Holmes stories, I love the characters, but I'm not a finger wagging type fan who feels the need to preface everything they say about the subject with phrases like, "I think you'll find....." I have no problem with writers and film makers changing things, putting an new spin to them. And Holmes has been around so long that no end of that type of thing has gone on already, everyone and his cat has had a go at doing it. I enjoy it when they do, especially when it's original, clever, entertaining, etc. I still love the original stories, nothing anyone does spoils that or the things that people have done since with Conan Doyle's original creations that I enjoy too. But that trailer..... Oh dear..... If they were doing all that kind of stuff with it and it actually looked good, then I could probably go with it but that....? That just looks.... awful! And why bother to adapt something if you're going to change it that much (and yes, I know it's based on a comic book, not the original stories.... but the comic book is!). If your opinion is, as the producers would seem to think, that your average cinema goer (i.e. 15-25) doesn't know who Sherlock Holmes is anyway therefore you need to give them the type of hero they expect in a film, to create a, "modern hero for a new franchise," why bother even using Holmes in the first place? Why not adapt one of the Victorian pulp fiction heroes that actually does all that stuff? Or, here's a shocking idea, actually create one of your own?!

I can honestly say my heart sank as I watched that trailer. It was like watching someone you love getting happy-slapped repeatedly for two minutes on YouTube.

Tags:

Comments

*cackles and then falls over, applauding loudly*

Hear, hear. When I first read the script and saw the movie poster, my first thought was simply that it would be a massive improvement if they would just take out "Holmes" and replace it each time in the script with "Dick Tracy."

*shudder*
I thought the very same thing! It looks as if Holmes is an old fashioned American Gangster in this trash.
It can't possibly be worse than some of the fanfic -- and for that matter, some of the profic -- I've read. (Yes, Mark Twain did write the absolute worst Holmes parody/pastiche ever put on paper and inflicted on an unsuspecting reader.)

I admit it, what I'm hoping this movie does is banish the curse of Nigel Bruce from all future depictions of Watson. Anything else is gravy.

I can honestly say my heart sank as I watched that trailer. It was like watching someone you love getting happy-slapped repeatedly for two minutes on YouTube.

Wholeheratedly agreed from the very depths of my Holmesian heart. I'm so, so sad in the face, it's not even funny.
Oh, I agree wholeheartedly with this. As I said to my boyfriend after watching the trailer, I expected the movie to be bad, but (and he completed my sentence for me) not THIS bad!

It's terrible. I have so many issues with this I don't even quite know where to start, except by a prolonged screaming session - AAAAAH!

Thanks for sharing this!
That was fantastic, and encapsulates everything I feel about this travesty. Especially the last line.
Hey, you have a userpic of Michael Jayston dialogue! That's fantastic.
I love Michael Jayston. That's one of my favourite quotes. :)
When I first saw the first few pictures from on set I thought 'Boy does this look SHIT but maybe Holmes is in disguise as a good for nothing tramp?'. Of course it's turned out to be that IS how his Holmes looks all the time.
It would take all day to list how wrong this Holmes is....
for starters the heavy Sexual Element. Where has Holmes sexual repression gone?
Holmes is very clean, Watson in this is going on about Holmes poor Hygiene.
Holmes fights with his mind, his mind is his greatest tool.
Also why are the outfits so poor? They look cheap and out of place. Most of what they are wearing doesn't even look Victorian English. >_<
Sorry, but I only just now noticed that your icon is of HOLMES BLOWING BUBBLES.

That makes me so incredibly happy, you have no idea. ;)

Also - THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT! When I first saw those set pictures, I was like "Ohhh... he'd better be in disguise. If he isn't..."

Ugh. Awful.
Oh, exactly. The trailer just killed me. I don't think I'll ever recover from the shear horror of it. *cries* Somebody, please, tell me this is just a nightmare.

And I completely agree: why use Holmes in the first place? The charming thing about Holmes is the fact that he IS Holmes: if you take away the Holmes-ness from Holmes, then what's the point?