rusty_armour: (holmes)
[personal profile] rusty_armour


In an effort to fight against my depression over the success of a certain film, I've decided to write a post about some of the benefits I've been able to reap from it. The first one that springs to mind is TCM's 24-hour Sherlock Holmes movie marathon. At first, I couldn't figure out why TCM would be holding a Sherlock Holmes marathon on Christmas. Then I remembered that Ritchie's film had just been released, so TCM was probably taking advantage of that. This, in turn, allowed me to take advantage of the marathon and tape six films I hadn't seen before (or, in the case of at least one film, hadn't seen in a very long time). Today, I watched the first four films.

The first film was Sherlock Holmes's Fatal Hour (aka The Sleeping Cardinal), which is from 1931 and stares Arthur Wontner as Sherlock Holmes. I have to admit that my expectations were pretty low for this movie as I saw Murder at the Baskervilles a few years ago and thought it was awful. However, Sherlock Holmes's Fatal Hour was better than I thought it might be. I mean, it was hardly brilliant, but it had a couple of things going for it. While I think Arthur Wontner would have been better suited to play Holmes after he retired, as he was too old for the part IMHO, I like the touches of humour he added. His bond with Mrs. Hudson seemed a little too close for Holmes, but I couldn't help finding it endearing.

The second film in the line up was A Study in Terror, which I had seen several years ago. It was made in 1966 and featured John Neville as Sherlock Holmes battling against Jack the Ripper. Despite having an excellent cast that also included Judi Dench, Anthony Quayle, and Frank Finlay, the movie was pretty cheesy and certainly didn't hold a candle to Murder by Decree (1979), which provided a much better story of Holmes's possible involvement with the Ripper Murders. For one thing, Murder by Decree actually stuck to the facts and didn't invent new ways to kill the Ripper victims. In the same way the Hammer version of The Hound of the Baskervilles tried to add extra chills and thrills by having that tarantula crawl across Henry Baskerville's shoulder, A Study in Terror had one woman die by having a knife shoved through her neck and another die by being shoved in a trough of water and viciously stabbed. If these weren't supposed to be Jack the Ripper murders, it wouldn't have bothered me. Well, despite a rather weak script, I quite liked John Neville as Holmes and it was great to see Anthony Quayle and Frank Finlay appear in this film and then return again in Murder by Decree. In fact, Frank Finlay played Inspector Lestrade in both Ripper movies!

Although I knew it wouldn't be a great, I taped The Spider Woman out of sheer curiousity. It was one of the Rathbone films I hadn't seen and I wondered if this female Moriarty would measure up considering that the Spider Woman character was so popular that she was later given her own film. Not surprisingly, The Spider Woman was pretty bad. At one point, Holmes darkens his face and disguises himself as Rahjni Singh, an Indian officer, which made me cringe. What was worse was the white actor dressed up as a Pygmy. Adrea Spedding was fun as a so-called female Moriarty, but I've seen more impressive female villains in the Rathbone films. I did get a kick out of the plot elements that were worked into the film from "The Speckled Band" and The Sign of Four, and I found it moving that Mrs. Hudson couldn't stop weeping when she thought Holmes was dead, and Watson told Lestrade that he could choose one of Holmes's pipes (which Holmes lets Lestrade keep when he returns from the dead).

I got the most enjoyment out of The Pearl of Death, which was very loosely based on "The Six Napoleons" and had a female villain (Naomi Drake) that adopted a total of four disguises. Okay, it was kind of on the cheesy side too, but I thought the plot held together a little better. I think I may even purchase this film on DVD at some point. It's certainly better than a couple of the other Rathbone films I already own. *g*

The last two films on the list are Pursuit to Algiers and The House of Fear. I'm pretty sure I haven't seen Pursuit to Algiers, though I believe I saw The House of Fear when I was in my early teens. I predict that The House of Fear will hold up better than Pursuit to Algiers, but I'm sure both will have their moments.

I doubt anyone is still reading this (if anyone began reading this in the first place), but another benefit of the Ritchie film is book and DVD merchandising. I'm sure it isn't a coincidence that Titan Books has created a new line of Sherlock Holmes books ("The Further Adventures of Sherlock Holmes") in the same year the Ritchie film was released. While I was staying at my parents over Christmas, I devoured David Stuart Davies' The Veiled Detective, which was originally published in 2004. This novel is rather dark but very clever. I'm really looking forward to reading more pastiches from Titan. Amazon (in its usual helpful manner) sent me a recommendation email for The Madness of Sherlock Holmes, which is a documentary on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and the characters he created -- most notably Sherlock Holmes. I'm sure the timing of this documentary isn't a coincidence, just as I'm sure it's something I'll probably have to order. *g*

Date: 2009-12-30 08:24 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] radiogaga80.livejournal.com
See? As Johan Cruyff said, "Every disadvantage has an advantage!" :D
I could almost hear you cringe though when the advert for the movie was on tv here last night *g* It'll be in theaters in early January here, apparently.

Date: 2009-12-30 04:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rusty-armour.livejournal.com
See? As Johan Cruyff said, "Every disadvantage has an advantage!" :D

This is very true! I've really got to try to have a more positive outlook. Unfortunately, I'm usually a glass-half-empty kind of girl, unless I'm trying to cheer someone else up. I can be a regular Pollyanna then. *g*

I could almost hear you cringe though when the advert for the movie was on tv here last night *g* It'll be in theaters in early January here, apparently.

If you throw in the image of me covering my eyes and groaning then you'll have the full picture. *g* I can't seem to escape that bloody trailer. It popped up once when I was checking my email and it was on the special features disc for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. As soon as I realized what it was, I started shouting, "Fast forward! Fast forward!" to my brother, who had the DVD remote in his hand.

Date: 2009-12-30 11:46 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] grondfic.livejournal.com
Oooh! Looks like a Vintage!Holmesgasm going on here.

Reviews of the RitchieFilm are very mixed so far. But I haven't made it out of the house yet (and won't do, until next Monday when work re-starts), so haven't yet decided on viewing or not.

Date: 2009-12-30 05:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rusty-armour.livejournal.com
Oooh! Looks like a Vintage!Holmesgasm going on here.

Oh, yeah. Big time. I'm actually surprised that anyone was able to stay awake for this entry considering the way I was geeking out over Vintage!Holmes. *g*

Reviews of the RitchieFilm are very mixed so far.

Really? Oh, that cheers me up immensely! I've been afraid to read the reviews considering how well the film has done in the box office. I didn't even try to find reviews from Sherlockians in case they actually liked the film. That would have broken my heart.

But I haven't made it out of the house yet (and won't do, until next Monday when work re-starts), so haven't yet decided on viewing or not.

Well, I won't try to influence your decision. With the exception of close family members (who I've either managed to intimidate or brainwash), I think pretty much everyone I know has seen or is planning to see the film. I'm just happy that there are people who don't like it. I think that's the best outcome I can hope for at the moment.

Date: 2009-12-30 03:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sublunarfields.livejournal.com
When I read about the Ritchie movie I was confused. Sometimes I got the impression there would be a gay Holmes, but lately what I've read suggests something different. Not that I really care. I'm taking your advice and won't watch it.

Over the years I must have seen a couple of different Sherlock Holmes and from what little I remember I don't really have a favorite (other than the books). Maybe the best Holmes is still to come some time in the future? Something like the RoS of Sherlock Holmes? But maybe that's too much to hope for.

Date: 2009-12-30 05:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rusty-armour.livejournal.com
When I read about the Ritchie movie I was confused. Sometimes I got the impression there would be a gay Holmes, but lately what I've read suggests something different. Not that I really care.

I think it depends on the interview, article or blurb in question. I think all hubbub about a gay Holmes only started up a couple of months ago - possibly because they thought it would draw more people into the theatres. I could be wrong, but I think they're probably playing up the gay Holmes angle.

I'm taking your advice and won't watch it.

If you're really interested in seeing the film then please don't let me stop you. I'm obviously pretty biased as I'm a little too into Sherlock Holmes. I suggest you read some of the reviews that have been written and make a decision based on those. In other words, seek out some objective opinions. *g*

Over the years I must have seen a couple of different Sherlock Holmes and from what little I remember I don't really have a favorite (other than the books). Maybe the best Holmes is still to come some time in the future? Something like the RoS of Sherlock Holmes? But maybe that's too much to hope for.

Well, if you're going to pick a favourite then the original stories are definitely the way to go! :-) I've watched too many Holmes movies and productions over the years not to have favourites. I personally think that Jeremy Brett made the best Sherlock Holmes (in the Granada episodes written before 1990) and I'm having a hard time picturing any actor who could surpass his performance. However, it's nice to think that the best Holmes portrayal might still be yet to come. :-)

Date: 2009-12-30 06:23 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] grondfic.livejournal.com
The problem is that Holmes became an Archetype, so people began treating him like other myth and folklore figures - he was everyone's property. It's quite a shock sometimes going back to the stories, to find out how many things one thinks of as 'Canon' are nothing of the kind.

(I'm experiencing similar problems with Allan Quartermain - also Archetyped. In his case it doesn't help that the author was the first 'fan' to play around with the original 'Canon' ... which of course begs the question - What exactly IS Canon?)

Date: 2009-12-31 04:11 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rusty-armour.livejournal.com
The problem is that Holmes became an Archetype, so people began treating him like other myth and folklore figures - he was everyone's property.

I hadn't thought of that before, but you're absolutely right. Holmes has definitely become a kind of mythic figure.

It's quite a shock sometimes going back to the stories, to find out how many things one thinks of as 'Canon' are nothing of the kind.

I know what you mean. I run across that problem with the Granada/Jeremy Brett episodes. The earlier episodes are usually very faithful to the original stories, but sometimes they'll change a line or add some little detail. I'll assume it's canon unless I go back to the original story or hear otherwise.

(I'm experiencing similar problems with Allan Quartermain - also Archetyped. In his case it doesn't help that the author was the first 'fan' to play around with the original 'Canon' ... which of course begs the question - What exactly IS Canon?)

That's another good point. Is Canon what H. Rider Haggard originally established or is it what he later added or changed? Conan Doyle often had conflicting details in the Holmes canon (e.g. Where exactly was Watson injured in Afghanistan? The leg? The shoulder? Both?), but I think that's more a matter of Conan Doyle losing track of what he wrote in earlier stories. *g*

Date: 2009-12-31 03:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] puckrobin.livejournal.com
I always liked the fan theory that Watson really was wounded in the behind, and he was just being delicate.

Date: 2009-12-30 07:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] puckrobin.livejournal.com
Holmes and Watson are no more, but not really any less, gay than House and Wilson are. In fact, their relationship in this film plays very, very close to the House/Wilson dynamic (which was based off Holmes/Watson.)

There's a little bit of banter, some almost jealousy that Watson is getting married to Mary Morstan (who doesn't appear to have been a client of Holmes here, but then nearly every other version ignores Watson's marriage - so I can't complain about that change).

Definitely stuff for slash fans to sink their teeth into, but they are not openly gay.

Holmes also has a sort of "I'm sort of interested in you, but really can't be" vibe going on with Irene Adler. Think Batman and Catwoman (particularly Adam West series). They are on opposite sides of the law, but there's a definite attraction that isn't really acted upon. (Oh, and they mention Adler having left her last husband and gone back to the Adler name.)

Date: 2009-12-30 04:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] njc2007.livejournal.com
I haven't been to see the new movie yet; but I expect I will. It looks like a fun romp even if it isn't true to canon. I think I have only ever seen one Holmes all the way through (Hound of the Baskervilles, maybe) and a few snippets from others, as well as Data on Star Trek (I really liked the Moriarty on Star Trek). My exposure to ACD was more Lost World related.

For the record: I read your whole post. I usually do.

Date: 2009-12-31 04:02 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rusty-armour.livejournal.com
I'm guessing the film probably will be a fun romp if you're not very familiar with Sherlock Holmes. Hell, maybe it's a fun romp even if you are. With any luck, it might get you interested in canon or, at least, fanfic. Unfortunately, I know there's already fic for the Ritchie film, but there's also fic for canon, thank Herne. *g*

BTW it was very kind of you to read my entire post. I was pretty sure that most people wouldn't have the patience to get through it considering the way I rambled on. Of course, most of my posts involve a fair bit of rambling. *g*

Date: 2009-12-31 02:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] njc2007.livejournal.com
I find your posts interesting, so I read them through. I usually read all the comments too. :) (That might scare off some of your friends. If so, I'm sorry.) I find your friend's comments to be enlightening.

Date: 2009-12-31 08:50 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rusty-armour.livejournal.com
I'm flattered that you find my posts interesting and are willing to read them all the way through. :-) And I'm sure my friends would also be flattered if they knew you read their comments and found them enlightening. I doubt that's going to scare them off. :-)

Date: 2009-12-30 06:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] puckrobin.livejournal.com
My thoughts on the movie:

The plot is garbage. I actually stopped paying attention to it after a while, and so I'm not sure it ended up making sense.

Mark Strong appears to make a career out of planning bland, evil aristocrats in costume films.

Holmes and Watson were much closer to the canon that you might think from the trailer. (After all, Holmes is a wrestler, boxer and can ... like Superman ... bend steel bars with his bare hands. Although the last one doesn't happen in the film.) They definitely push Holmes more towards the eccentric artist than the cold logician, but Brett went that way at times too. (And after all, Holmes does, in the canon, credit the detection skills to art manifesting in the blood.)

It's still hard for me to picture Holmes as Robert Downey Jr., but he does do a lot of canonical things and I recognized some lines straight from the stories. "I cannot make bricks without clay" for example. Still he doesn't quite look or feel quite right.

Jude Law was a very good Watson. He's smarter and wittier than usual (and a little more than the canon might allow for). And they used bits from the canon, like the reason why Watson needed his chequebook locked up.

Given a better plot with fewer explosions and Scooby-Doo magic, the Downey/Law pairing would have been pretty good.

Date: 2009-12-31 04:23 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rusty-armour.livejournal.com
I've been actually very curious to know what you thought of the film, so thanks for this mini-review! :-) During the one time I managed to sit through the entire trailer, I did notice that there were certain details that matched canon Holmes, such as the boxing. While I agree that Holmes definitely displays traits of an eccentric artist, I think he's more likely to embrace cold logic -- at least a lot of the time. I have a hard time buying him being the eccentric artist all the time. And I know I'm biased, but Robert Downey Jr. has never seemed right for the part (based on what little I've seen from trailers, etc.), which seems strange because he's a very good actor and I'm sure he could have done the role justice if he'd had a decent script.

Jude Law is about the only thing that seems right about the film. He looks the part and seems to act the part (again based on what little I've seen from trailers, etc.). Maybe he'll be like Ian Hart and be able to reprise the role in a better production later on. For that matter, maybe both he and Robert Downey Jr. could reprise their roles with more satisfying results if even a semi-decent screenplay were to appear...

Date: 2009-12-31 05:54 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] puckrobin.livejournal.com
The ending definitely says "we want to make more of these films". Really, if they get a better script next time, that wouldn't be a bad thing. They have strong leading actors, and there's much to be said for that.

Holmes fights in a way that seems really appropriate for Batman, but makes sense for Holmes too. They start with him in slow-mo assessing his opponent's weaknesses, what counter-maneuver to use and the result. And then they come out and show Holmes doing it for real at a fast pace. It's not a terrible concept.

A friend of mine who reads the Holmes stories every year remarked they pushed the canon about as far as it can go, but they don't really break it. (Other than Watson introducing Holmes to his finance, of course.)

Allen

Date: 2009-12-31 06:17 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rusty-armour.livejournal.com
Actually, when I pictured a better script, I was thinking of something outside the Ritchie franchise. However... *g*

Date: 2010-01-05 11:38 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] boobamiaow.livejournal.com
I saw it yesterday and thought it was ok. The first half of the film I thought was total poo and I was fidgeting and wanting to leave. The 2nd half was much better. Like others have said, I'm not sure about RDJ but Jude was fab!

I liked the sets and the CGI-seeing what London may have looked like. I kept thinking it didn't seem suitable for 12 year olds bc the slow mo fight scenes were a tad violent-but they prob won't blink an eye at it. I also found the first half of the plot quite shambolic and wondered how the 3 12 yr old boys in front of me were keeping up with it. One of them was fidgeting loads so I think he was bored ;p

I didn't like Mark Strong in it. I had mixed feelings about Rachel Mcadams too. I think a sequel might be better? But I want the sequel to Rochnrolla first!

Date: 2010-01-05 05:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rusty-armour.livejournal.com
Thanks for sharing your thoughts about the Ritchie film! Despite my boycotting campaign, I have been curious to hear what people have to say about it. So far it seems as if Jude Law is the best thing about the movie, which doesn't really surprise me somehow.

I haven't seen Rochnrolla, but I'm pretty sure creating a sequel for that film would be a more worthwhile endeavour than a sequel for Ritchie's other film. *g*

Profile

rusty_armour: (Default)
rusty_armour

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 16th, 2025 09:06 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios