comment #1

Ethan says ...

Get over it Jeff. Che was never going to get a wide release.

comment #2

Breedlove says ...

I can't quite get a handle on where Ritchie stands career-wise. I thought his career was sort of in the toilet. His most recent movie, the Gerard Butler one, was supposedly a return to form but it barely got released. It seems a bit odd that he was handed the reigns to this big-budget franchise wannabe with the hottest actor in town attached. But what do I know. I'm really hoping that Jeff's take on this is wrong...I don't mind if he boxes or there is a fight scene or two but it still needs to be a Sherlock Holmes movie.

comment #3

Jeremy Fassler says ...

This movie could either be really good or really bad. The idea to bring Sherlock back is terrific, but it may just need a better director than Guy Ritchie. Personally I think the best Sherlock Holmes ever was Jeremy Brett. Those TV episodes in many cases are better than the old Basil Rathbone movies. Brett comes closer to Doyle's original creation than any other actor before or since.

comment #4

Ms. M says ...

Ritchie making changes to Holmes doesn't seem like that big a deal to me. This has happened for ages in popular culture in lots of ways. There's been Young Sherlock Holmes, the Rathbone series moved the time period to World War II, and even a cartoon where Holmes moved centuries into the future. Its part of the charm of the character as a pop culture icon.

comment #5

Sabina E says ...

I like Ritchie's other films, LOCK STOCK and SNATCH, but I can't see how his style will work for SHERLOCK HOLMES...

come on, Wells, give it a chance. He just may prove all of us wrong.

comment #6

fitz-hume says ...

I went to see RocknRolla without any higher than high expectations and I ended up enjoying it a lot. So much so that I can't really argue with those hailing it as a return to form from Ritchie. Even if it was a slightly recycled return. Coming off that I think Sherlock has promise. It has Downey Jr in lead and the movie doesn't stray too far away from Guy's comfort zone but at the same time takes him into a slightly different kind of setting and into a different kind of era.

comment #7

The Winchester says ...

Whatever, it can't be any worse than Quantum of Solace.

comment #8

JustThisGuy says ...

Facts about Sherlock Holmes:

-Superb Fencer and Boxer

-Had knowledge of Bartitsu, which he utilized in a battle to the death with Moriarty which ended Moriarty in falling over a water fall.

-There have been several scenes with Holmes fighting people in the canon, including one where he eggs a drunk into attacking him so he can whip his ass in a bare-knuckle boxing match.

-The Deer Stalker and the Inverness coat are the two most inaccurate things in the surprisingly inaccurate Rathbone films. While Holmes did where such things in the canon, he only wore them when in the country. While in London he wore traditional mens wear, including suit and top hat.
-Holmes and Watson would have both been in their mid-30s, and both in fairly good shape.

Seems like most people that complain about a specific movie vision of Holmes don't really have much knowledge of the Holmes stories themselves.

Now, that said, I do have some concerns about this movie, but I think we do need to be honest about who Holmes is in the books.

comment #9

moviemaniac2002 says ...

"RocknRolla" went through all the Ritchie moves, but I sensed a fundamental lack of energy and
creative spark...it was missing the snap,crackle and pop of the first two London-thug films...it was as if the years of playing the role of
Mr.Madonna had drained half his strength and
inspiration...
I certainly don't begrudge anything new he's
trying with Holmes....everyone else has had a shot at reinventing the character. As for Warners
executives....well, these are the guys who spent
200 million on "Superman Returns"....and let its
director turn the film into a lame, humorless
half-baked homage to Donner's original.
Always remember William Goldman's sage
advice...."Nobody knows anything"

comment #10

Drew says ...

Jeff's blinding lack of knowledge of Holmes and the Holmes canon is going to color his coverage on this film all the way from now until release, because for some reason, he seems to think those moldy, mawkish Basil Rathbone films are more authentic to Holmes than what, you know, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote.

You're wrong about this, Jeff. I've become a de facto Holmes expert by virtue of the nickname Harry gave me all those years ago. People have given me more Holmes stuff over the years than I know what to do with. And having absorbed it all, then having actually read the scripts for this film and been onset and having actually seen chunks of the movie now, it's my INFORMED opinion (as opposed to your knee-jerk one) that this is one of the most faithful and even traditional takes on Holmes that anyone's attempted. It's not a post-modern reinvention a la "The Seven Percent Solution." It's just Holmes, finally given all the rough edges Doyle gave him.

Get over it, Jeff.

comment #11

Jeffrey Wells says ...

Wells to Drew: You can summon the ghost of Arthur Conan Doyle and bring him over to my home and have him instruct me, Annie Hall-style, about what an ignoramus I am about Sherlock Holmes lore, and you'll still lose this argument. The Holmes character is about exceptional cerebral-intellectual derring-do...the sharpest detective who ever lived by virtue of his BRAIN....end of story. The legend says so and I don't want to know anything else along these lines. Don't try and blow smoke up my ass with the facts. The facts don't matter & nobody wants to know them. You can talk until you're blue in the face, but to go by all indications Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes film is just more corporate, kick-boxing, martial-arts audience-pandering bullshit, and you know it. You know Ritchie, and so do I. He's a one-trick pony and in terms of being a potentially exciting guy with the potential of making something exceptional he's been "over" for years. Nobody knows anything but his Holmes pic will probably walk, talk, act and smell a lot like From Hell.

comment #12

lazarus says ...

Just watched Murder By Decree the other night, the Holmes vs. Jack the Ripper film from '79, with Christopher Plummer as Holmes (perfect) and James Mason as Watson (almost as good). Really well-done film, especially when compared to From Hell, with which it shares a lot of elements.

The director? Jeff Wells' favorite Bob Clark.

comment #13

actionman says ...

well there you have it

comment #14

JustThisGuy says ...

While Holmes intellectual prowess is certainly important, just as important are his street smarts and his ability to handle himself. Holmes wouldn't have survived in the places he spent most of his time (namely the seedier parts of Victorian London) without being able to give as good as he takes.

I'd go so far to say the most interesting part of his character is the bizarre duality of a person who has extreme intellectual ability and knowledge of the English social system, but is also has cocaine and morphine addictions, is close to Asperger's in his ability to deal with people socially, and spends much of his time trawling the London underground (and I don't mean the subway system)

comment #15

tommysunshine says ...

Drew, you don't have a clue. If you are going to take off your cloak of objectivity and your impartiality pants, I suggest you bedhop with someone other than guy ritchie. Not since Glenn Kenny extolled the virtues of The Lucky Ones has anything so absurd been written about a film on the internet.
Wells is sceptical with good reason. This film, judging by the recent track record of Ritchie, Jude Law and Joel Silver will suck. Come the end of the year, Drew will be silent about his sherlock expertise. But I'm fed up of super-annuated wannabe cyber gunslingers taking advantage of new technology to do the bidding for upcoming blockbusters of which they know nothing. Strange, as it may seem, Drew and his crew of clueless charlatans are influential among the 18-25 cine-challenged demographic. If we collectively try, we can put a stop to this nonsense

comment #16

JustThisGuy says ...

Or you could read Doyle.

comment #17

Monument says ...

I don't know anything about Ritchie's Holmes, but having read the canon several times over, I can say with confidence that Holmes and Watson have been horribly translated to film, specifically the Basil Rathbone films. The deerstalker hat was never a daily accessory, the magnifying glass was mentioned maybe once, and Watson was never the "dunce" that the films made him out to be.

Basil Rathbone is a caricature, Jeremy Brett is the only actor ever to have captured the character.

comment #18

JustThisGuy says ...

I'll second the Brett love. He's the only one who's ever really gotten close to who the character really is.

comment #19

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

Ritchie really needs to hit this one out of the park if he enjoys filmmaking as a career. Which -- given the energy level of his last few movies -- I'm not sure that he does...

He's really in a tight spot because he seems entirely bored lately by the material he handles best (Revolver, Rock n Rolla), and if Swept Away is any indication, the guy has very little range or curiosity outside his very narrow scope/genre.

Is it possible to go from directing commercials to directing feature films, back to directing music videos?

comment #20

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

"Don't try and blow smoke up my ass with the facts. The facts don't matter & nobody wants to know them."

Wow. Just wow. lol

comment #21

moveable hype says ...

"Don't try and blow smoke up my ass with the facts. The facts don't matter & nobody wants to know them."

I have a feeling that quote is going to bite someone in the ass one day.

comment #22

Ethan says ...

Man, Jeff's been really cranky and close-minded lately. Wait, scratch that. Always.

Anyway, I gotta say I'm looking forward to a Holmes featuring wire-fu and crazy sword fights with giant warrior panda bears. Sound fun.

comment #23

hawthorne says ...

You know I read your words every day Jeff and look forward to it very much. But I also know from past history there are times you get an idea that you are going to hate a film and no matter what you will hate this film forever. You can say what you want about Guy but you are wrong in saying that they are getting on some kind of martial arts bandwagon. I am no Holmes expert but I know enough that he was very good at some kind of weird old form of martial arts and he was a boxer as well. These facts are in the books. Downey happens to have years of martial arts training so it seemed natural to use this aspect in the movie. Warner Brothers or Guy did not make this up. But like I said... I can tell that even if you end up secretly liking this movie we will never hear that here. That's fine. That is your right but I just find it kind of amusing. I am taking a wait and see attitude. I personally love period movies like this and the set photos I have seen look good. I am hoping for the best.

comment #24

Quincyspeak says ...

seriously. wells. what is about you "bods." i know you're already pathetic, kind of a waste of a soul type of thing, but does this movie look really good because robert downey has rock hard abs?

seriously? what is wrong with you???? seriously. explain, you gotta explain this. I mean is there anything about you that is redeeming? I can't think of anything.

besides being a superficial fuck, judging a movie because of the stomach of a lead character is beyond moronic.

shoot yourself now. save yourself.

comment #25

The Winchester says ...

Nobody played Holmes better than Michael Caine in Without A Clue.

Moiarty's real name is Arty Morty.

comment #26

D.Z. says ...

hawthorne: He might know boxing, but he used it on a limited basis. I wasn't fond of "The Da Vinci Code", but I'd imagine the people who read the book would be fairly pissed, if the movie adaptation turned Langdon into a UFC fighter.

comment #27

hawthorne says ...

Good point D.Z. But I still say don't hate the film because it is getting into some original source material that not everyone is familiar with.

comment #28

JCuster says ...

"Wells to Drew: You can summon the ghost of Arthur Conan Doyle and bring him over to my home and have him instruct me, Annie Hall-style, about what an ignoramus I am about Sherlock Holmes lore, and you'll still lose this argument. The Holmes character is about exceptional cerebral-intellectual derring-do...the sharpest detective who ever lived by virtue of his BRAIN....end of story. The legend says so and I don't want to know anything else along these lines. Don't try and blow smoke up my ass with the facts. The facts don't matter & nobody wants to know them."

Really?

Jeff, you've pushed some pretty ridiculous BS before, but this comment kind of takes the cake.

The facts don't matter? No one wants to know them?

I hate Ritchie as a filmmaker (meaning, thus far, I've not enjoyed a single one of his films). Given this, the idea of him tackling Holmes (a favorite character) had me rolling my eyes.

But you know what? Drew is right. And you are so very, very, very, very, very wrong that it's frankly hilarious. The facts DO matter, and the fidelity to Conan Doyle's ACTUAL CHARACTER, as opposed to a cinematic interpretation of that character, is just that - a fact. Maybe you, Jeff Wells, perma-crank and spouter of half-baked opinion, don't want to know these facts. Maybe they break your petulant rage up into smaller, less convincing pieces. But everyone who isn't Jeff Wells (or GWB) actually likes facts. They represent REALITY.

comment #29

iamwhoiam says ...

I'm sorry, Jeff, but you're making a fool out of yourself here. You may want to read some original SH stories, and you'll see that Basil Rathbone couldn't be further from the original character. Do you know that in no Conan Doyle story, Holmes said "Elementary, my dear Watson"? NEVER!
I'm not a fan of Guy Ritchie, but there's nothing wrong woth some contemporary and fresh adaptation of a fictional story.

comment #30

iamwhoiam says ...

"Don't try and blow smoke up my ass with the facts. The facts don't matter & nobody wants to know them".

Jeff, you sure didn't vote for Bush?

comment #31

Monument says ...

DZ, that's a stupid example. The books are very clear about Holmes' boxing ability, he may not box often in the stories but it's clearly mentioned in the back story. There was one in particular (can't remember the title) where Holmes is recognized by a prizefighter who knew him from his boxing days.

comment #32

D.Z. says ...

Monument: But he boxes as a hobby, not as a career.

comment #33

Nike Duck Shoes says ...

your website is so great that i love it very much. thank you for sharing it with us.